++ This review contains or might contain spoilers++
Last Tango in Paris tells the story of the sexual relationship between Paul -played by Marlon Brando- a mature selfish widower, and Jeanne -played by Maria Schneider- a naive 20y.o. emotionally immature girl.
Despite what one might think, the movie is not about sex, but about obsession, manipulation, grieving, deceit, primal emotions and social constrictions.
THE CHARACTERS One of the most fascinating things about this movie is how well drawn the characters are. They are multifaceted, never simple or linear, very human, but also very archetypal and symbolic. The viewer can hate or love them, but, even if one can't fully understand them, there is a feeling of acceptance and even empathy.
Paul is an obsessive person, who had an open relationship with his wife -the only way he believes love should be, free from any obligation. When his wife commits suicide, he is shocked. He takes the suicide as a proof of his wife's emotional treachery. A mix of grief and hatred, pain and disenchantment with love, is what Paul is feeling when he meets Jeanne. She is half his age and easy to manipulate, as she's emotionally insecure and unhappy with her boyfriend, who uses her like a doll. They are like water on fire.
Paul channels his conflicting emotions through raw sex. He forces Jeanne into a situation that it is not good for her, a fact that she realises early on. Jeanne is looking from love and for personal appreciation, the one she doesn't get with her boyfriend, and to be loved for who she is. However, Paul creates a situation of complete emotional and sexual domination by establishing the rules of their meetings, which only benefit him. The Society and world that Paul wants to leave behind is, after all, a wish to return to Paradise. The fact that the couple play and talk like baboons in their rendezvous is a metaphor of this primeval relationship and the space of mind that Paul wants.
Jeanne's character and her relationship with Paul is the catalyst for her inner transformation - the way she relates to men in general, and her boyfriend in particular. She is like a lamb at the beginning of the movie, but like a lioness at the end. Despite her obsession with Paul, she is able to see her own dependence and starts fighting it until she frees herself completely.
THE PERFORMANCES The respective ages and
level of maturity/immaturity of Brando and Schneider are perfect for
their characters, and the acting is convincing and dynamic on both parts.
Brando is great in his performance, superb sometimes, especially when he's able to relax in front of the camera and improvise those monologues for which he became famous. The scene in which the recalls the story of his childhood is so real and powerful that you feel that he's the character he's playing; the same can be said of his scene with Massimo Girotti (who plays the lover of Paul's wife). I found some of his crying scenes heartfelt, but some others a bit phoney. Despite Schneider's acting being labelled poor, she brings to her role exactly what it is needed, and what Bertolucci wanted from her. She plays with freshness, naivety, and emotional maturity a character that is extremely difficult, has many colours, and does so in front of a mature Brando, who was a legend at the time.
THE (IN)FAMOUS SEX SCENES The movie is disturbing
sometimes, but not because of the sex scenes. The raunchy images that scandalised the world in the 1970s are, in most cases, not that raunchy for modern standards. Nudity is limited, and the bed scenes are more hinted and talked about than explicitly shown.
The only scene that I consider confronting is the one involving the butter bar. I had a strong emotional reaction against the scene, and I found it disturbing, despite the characters being dressed, and some men viewers considering the scene "hot". It felt like a rape to me. Alas, in an interview, Maria Schneider mentions that this scene wasn't originally in the script, that it was Brando's idea, that Bertolucci loved it, that she didn't want to do it; however, she was was forced to do it, and that she felt raped; her tears in the movie were real and personal, not the characters'.
THE ATMOSPHERE I thought that it was one of the best things of the movie as masterly reflects the soul and essence of the characters, individually and as couple. The mix of colours, lighting, and music are in perfect tune with each other. Thus, the atmosphere is dark and claustrophobic, bizarre and horror-like when focuses on Paul's world.
The atmosphere is clear, luminous, fresh and bucolic when focuses on Jeanne's world.
The atmosphere is warm minimal and with a a pronounced chiaroscuro in the love meetings of the couple in the empty apartment.
The atmosphere is decadent, theatrical, and "run out" in the Tango dancing scenes.
To blend it all, the sound track by Gato Barbieri is beautifully unsettling.
THE FLAWS I found the movie a little too long, too theatrical at times, and some bits unnecessary and distracting. The tempo is uneven, not fluid or natural, more theatrical than cinematic. Maria Schneider's wardrobe is really poor and she wears the same attire for most of the movie. This is not an easy movie to watch, or so did I find.
***
Last Tango in Paris is
one of these movies that gets stuck to your memory for a long time. The
more time passes, the more it settles in. Few movies in the History of Cinema have been able to achieve that, especially one as disturbing as
this one is.Last Tango in Paris gets under your skin, gives you a gut reaction, and you like it and hate it at the same time. The movie is a terrific characters' study, and offers unforgettable images and performances that are already part of the History of Cinema.
Krysar is an adult stop-motion animation film, loosely based on the German folk tale the Pipe Piper of Hamelin. A real art-house piece of animation that has a mix of Renaissance and Medieval elements. There are many original elements about this film. The first one is the story, which deviates from the original, or better said digs into its original meaning, to offer a social allegory. Barta's Hamelin is a greedy, glutton and lusty male-dominated society - a kind of Sodom and Gomorrah. The piper is the punisher and redemptor, and the catalyst necessary for human renewal. The children are only seen at the end.
The second element of originality is its language... which is onomatopoeic: sounds, grunts, mumblings and gibbering, perfectly understandable by anybody in the world. I found it hilarious!
The third element of originality is the visual style of the movie, traditional and innovative at the same time, very odd and very artistic. Hamelin's backgrounds, architecture and interiors are made of dark carved wood, similar to the ones you find in some Renaissance cathedral choir chairs. The overall design is German expressionist in its design, which is noticeable in the diagonal and curved collapsing lines, unbalanced proportions and oniric elements, and the general darkness and oppressiveness of the space and atmosphere. On the contrary, the luminous colourful paintings used for the landscape are bucolic and very artistic, the sort of images you find in Medieval Gothic Books of Hours. They are human spaces, associated to the most human characters in the story, and a complete counterpoint to the rest. I found in the movie very Bergman's, with the sort of vibe, feeling, and themes one can find in movies like The Seventh Seal or the Virgin Spring.
The third element of originality is the design of the characters. Most of the Hamelin dwellers are wood puppets, with mobile parts and fabric clothing; they have angular-faces and are thin and tall. The Piper is also a wood puppet, but it looks very different - a mixture of walking skeleton, a Goth band member, and an apocalyptic angel. The only two good characters and pure souls in the city -the lady living in the city outskirts and the fisherman- are very refined sweet and delicate wooden puppets. The rest of the characters are the rats, real ones (more like big mice!), which are as big the human characters, naughty monsters as greedy as the humans, which move rapidly and awkwardly.
The music is terrific - a mix of dark classic pieces and rock sounds with the ethereal sound of the flute as only breaker.
The ending is great, and has nothing to do with the traditional story. It couldn't be otherwise, as the movie is an allegorical reflection of Society's sins. The title in Czech means rat trapper, which refers to the rats in Hamelin and also to its dwellers, which are a pest as much as the rats are, and the piper also traps.
I found annoying that some general scenes -landscapes shots, movement of groups- were repeated over and over.
The film is not for small kids because there are too many adult explicit elements in it: lust, rape, killing of animals, stealing, death, and the general nastiness of the dwellers of the city.
Krysar is an amazing movie, but also a bit freaky and grotesque! Dare to watch it.
** Warning - This review may contain spoilers. I recommend watching the movie and then coming here, especially if the ending intrigues you, and it will **
Mr Nobody is the story of Nemo, whose possible two life lines and three love stories are alternatively presented.
The movie is well
shot and the cast members convincing, especially Jared Leto (as adult
Nemo), who is always perfect in this sort of odd films and roles. Also excellent are Toby
Regbo (15y.o. Nemo), Juno Temple (15y.o. Anna) and Sarah Polley (depressive adult Elise). Diana Kruger (as adult Anna), Rhys Ifans (Nemo's father, Natasha Little (Nemo's mother), among many others, are OK in their respective roles.
The
visual effects are wonderfully understated, very well blended with and at the
service of the story. The theatrical movie sets, the
rich colours, the different hues attached to each different life path,
the wardrobe, and the lovely music -which mixes some old classic tunes with pieces specifically composed for the movie- create an ensemble that is very
easy on the eye.
However, Mr Nobody is a great movie mostly because of its subtle but profound reflection on Human Nature, Human behaviour, Free Will and the meaning of life. The movie reflects on questions like - what makes us what we are? Why we act the way we do? Is free choice a key element to happiness? How does other people's choices affect our choices? The philosophical, psychological, and metaphysical questions posed are sometimes explicitly mentioned, while others are hinted and expressed through the story as a whole, each different life line story in particular, and through Nemo and the other characters' behaviour. Among others, some of the concepts presented here are: 1. Butterfly effect. 2. Principle of Entropy. 3. Schrodinger's Cat Paradox 4. String Theory 5. The Pigeon's Superstition experiment 6. The Nature of the true self. 7. Free will and
fate. 8. The linearity of (or multidimensional nature of) Time. 9. Quantum Physics and parallel universes.
Do not worry if some of these things sound alien to you. They were also alien to me. However, they were intriguing enough for me to get more information, and try to understand what I have seen better. In fact, they are a reason to watch the movie again. However, you can watch it without even bothering, and you will find that the movie still speaks to you.
Jaco Van Darmael himself commented on the script and on his initial intentions in an interview. However, the story has taken a life of his own, way beyond the initial intention of the director.
***
THE ENDING OF THE MOVIE - MY INTERPRETATION The film ends in a way that is open to interpretation. Movie forums are full of comments on the ending, and on Nemo's different lives, actions and reactions. To, me, however, they miss a few important things that are pivotal to understand the way the movie ends. Or, at least, the way I understand it: 1/ The Lyrics of the song Mr Sandman, which is repeatedly played thorough the whole movie, especially the main verses. Are we watching something real or is it just a dream? A lucid dream? 2/ The beginning of the film, with the different possible endings, which all end with Nemo dead, lost in a rhomboidal aseptic nightmarish dream-like world. The narrator is Nemo himself. 3/ The scene where Nemo tells how he was born, which goes from minutes 12.20 to 15 approximately. Here my transcription of what Nemo's off voice says:
"I can remember a long time ago, long before my birth, in the squeezing with those not yet born. When we aren't born yet, you know everything. Everything that's going to happen. When it's your time, the angels of the living put their finger on your mouth and leave a mark on the upper lip. It means that you've forgotten everything.
But the angels missed me.
[Nemo immerses himself in a white milk-like liquid, as he is ready to being born]
Then you have to find a daddy and mammy, and that's not easy to choose.
[Different couples speak about their wishes to have a baby, until Nemo's parents appear]
In the end, I chose them because the lady smells nice, and the man said 'Well, I can tell you how we met. It meant to be. Have you heard of the butterfly effect?' ".
4/ The title of the movie is "Mr Nobody". Shouldn't this, per se, be an indication of something? Anything? Any bell ringing in your ears, yet?
Many of the
interpretations about the meaning of the movie
focus on the event that is photographed in the poster of the movie, but we need to remember that unborn Nemo chose his parents. Therefore, the moment of decisive choice is not the one in the poster, but the one of choosing his parents.
We are told, explicitly, that Nemo can see the future, any possibility in the future, every possible action and reaction in his life because the angels missed him. Therefore, all the couples that appear at the beginning are a possibility. Nemo chooses one. The more you think about it, the clearer you come to the conclusion that unborn Nemo is seeing his possible life IF he selected this couple as his parents, NOT after selecting them as his parents. Not convinced?
Now, we have the part of the movie in which we see centenary Nemo telling his life story/ies to a journalist. At a certain point, the world in which they are living starts to fade out and disintegrate, as it was a projection or a dream. And that is what it is. Something that is not real at all. All this world is white in colour, the same limbo and space of possibility in which Nemo immerses himself before being born. Old Nemo is not real, it is the way unborn Nemo sees himself if he chooses the parents shown at the beginning. If that wasn't true, how do you explain the fact that Nemo is the narrator of the three possible endings that we see at the beginning of the movie?
***
There are other movies that reflect on the effect that personal choice and randomness, free will, determination, fate, and the butterfly effect have in our lives. Just to mention three, just remember Sliding Doors, Run Lola Run, and Cloud Atlas. However, they do not have the clarity and depth that Mr Nobody has.
Mr Nobody is a very
complex film, which, however, is very entertaining and easy on the eye.
After all, it is a possible multiple love story. You can see it in many
different ways and give it the interpretation you want. However, this is a film that needs of certain frame of mind to watch it,
as this is not your usual fantasy or science-fiction movie.
Mr. Nobody is one of the most interesting and thought-provoking film I have watched in a long time. Perfect for Philosophy classes, and for oiling the creases of your brain in those days in which you feel them a bit rusty.Mr. Nobody is one of those movies that linger in the back seat of you mind for days, long after you have watched it. "No
choice is still a choice" is one of the statements presented in the movie on which I have been pondering for days. Would
knowing your fate help you to make a choice? Is one of those questions that did the same to me. The film
is full of statements and questions that will keep you thinking, for good. A cult film already.
