Friday, November 22, 2013

My Current Director Obsession: Ali Hatami



This director is by no means someone that I am only “currently” obsessed with; this is a filmmaker of whom I have been aware almost all my life. I remember the day that he died, at the age of 52, of cancer. I was still young, but I knew that he was a big deal in the world of Iranian cinema. It took me a while to finally watch my first one of his films, which was one of his last films, 1991’s Madar (Mother). This director’s name was Ali Hatami, he was Iran’s greatest storyteller and his legacy has been forgotten. There are several reasons for this: his films were unquestionably Persian, thus his works would not translate for foreign audiences. This also means that his films are more or less lost for viewing, with one of the few ways to see his work being on youtube, where the videos look awful and discoloured, often lacking subtitles, again alienating viewers. Even then, there are not enough of his films on there. I have personally seen a total of three of his films myself (with a fourth recently found), so his work is scarce. The truth is that Ali Hatami’s name needs to be up there with the names of Kiarostami, Farrokhzad and Mehrjui as one of the early auteurs of Iranian cinema.

In pre-revolutionary Iranian cinema, influences came from far and wide. The French New Wave was a clear influence for many filmmakers, something that is clearly visible in the earlier works of Kiarostami, when he would channel the works of Truffaut in his films about children. Others were influenced by communist cinema (Kamran Shirdel and Santiago Alvarez were working at roughly the same time, so it is difficult to tell who influenced who), the avant-garde and even sexploitation cinema. It is difficult to tell who exactly influenced Hatami, though. Hatami served two purposes for Iranian cinema: he was a storyteller and a historian. In this sense, he served the function of Roberto Rossellini for a culture which has a long history. His first film, 1970’s Hassan Kachal (Hassan the Bald), the first Persian musical, has even taken on a mythical status itself, becoming a fairy tale of sorts, an object that every child in Iran grows up knowing. Hassan is tricked by his mother into leaving the house, where he meets a girl and falls in love. Just thinking of this film, which launched Parviz Sayyad’s career (essentially, Iran’s Jerry Lewis), is making me sing some of the songs, despite the fact that I haven’t seen the film in well over a decade; it’s as if the film is ingrained within me somehow. I acknowledge that I mentioned that Madar was my first Hatami, but that’s only because I never really thought of Hassan Kachal as a Hatami film; this film is from a time before I knew what a filmmaker was!

Soon after, after making a small number of films which have become lost to time, or at least to me, Hatami became a historiographer, making films about national heroes and similar figures, including Sattar Khan, a film about the eponymous revolutionary hero, Hajji Washington, about Iran’s first ambassador to the United States, and Kamalolmolk, about the famed Persian painter. This shift also happened to fall in the middle of the early parts of the Islamic revolution that plagued Iran in the late-70s, so his works often faced censorship, just like any other work and he had artistic freedom taken from him. His pre-revolution films were aided by the fact that the actors could be natural, but after the revolution, archaic rules threatened to make his films more stilted. Madar proved that this worry was unwarranted. Telling the tale of a woman’s last days, as her children gather to say goodbye (one of her children being a developmentally disabled man portrayed by Akbar Abdi). Despite the fact that the siblings are dressed oddly modestly around each other and there’s little-to-no male-female contact in the film, the emotional honesty that Hatami infuses into his work hides all of that. If a comparison has to be made, I would say that this is Hatami’s Tokyo Story; he is quite Ozu-esque in style in the later parts of his career. In the end, the mother dies. It falls on her daughter to explain to her developmentally challenged brother what has occurred. Instead of making a big spectacle of it, the scene sees the two sitting together, the daughter heartbroken, crying, as she slowly repeats to her brother “madar mord” (“mother died”), which her brother understands by responding “madar mord chon ke jan nadarad” (“mother died because she has no life”). The film boils death down to a very basic understanding of lacking life, minimalistic in its own beautiful way.

Madar was immediately followed by Del-Shodegan (The Love-Stricken), a film about the first Persian musicians who went to France to record music on a record; the pioneers of recorded Persian music, as it were. This film combined the poetry of Madar with the historical obsession of his earlier films, resulting in a Homeric epic with an incredible score. When the deal falls through, these musicians end up trapped in France with no way to get back home. This film may well be the one that most resonated with me, because it took a historic event and used it to explain the situation of a displaced individual, a Persian who suddenly winds up in a western world, a stranger in a strange land. This is the experience of an immigrant. I have experienced it and so have many others. Clearly, these musicians made it back; after all, they are historical figures, but the historical element is not of as much interest, as the people who are forced to leave behind their homes and lives with little prior warning. Hatami was clearly a wise individual.

He made one more film after this, a film with very little information on it. It was apparently edited from Hezardastan, his epic, historical television series which is often named his best work (and which I have been unable to find). Unfortunately, he died before he had a chance to create more of these masterpieces. IMDb has sixteen credits for him as a director. That is not my issue. My issue is that this master of the art form is almost entirely ignored. The majority of books that I have read on Iranian cinema do not even mention his name once. Certainly, he is a national figure, but that should be enough, shouldn’t it? I asked Hamid Naficy earlier this year where he believes Hatami’s place is in Iran’s cinema. He responded, and others agreed, that he has an important place in this history, but that his films belong in the country. Why? I say his films need to break out of the country and be seen by everyone, so he can be recognized as the auteur that he is.

Monday, November 11, 2013

Review of Blue is the Warmest Colour



Before going into Blue is the Warmest Colour, I was worried about the fact that this is a lesbian film made by a straight man (allegedly, quite a terrible one, too). The problem with this is that such films tend to go one of two ways: either the film becomes a sexual fantasy from the male gaze (Room in Rome, which, despite what anyone says, is nothing more than a beautifully-shot “nudie cutie”, the sort of film Russ Meyer or Jesus Franco could make with a high budget) or a film which, in order to avoid being exploitative, removes all sexuality from the film (John Sayles’ otherwise brilliant Lianna).
I was also worried about seeing a sexual romantic film, because, again, cinema seems incapable of creating sexual romances. The last great sexual romance goes back to 1989’s My Nights are More Beautiful than Your Days, a film that even Zulawski himself could not recreate, not for a lack of trying. The great cinematic romances tend to be neutered, with the greatest cinematic romance, Brief Encounter, having absolutely no sex, implied or otherwise. Once sex finds its way into romance, the genre tends to change towards the erotic thriller or some other moralizing genre. Think: why is there no such thing as an erotic romance or erotic romantic comedy? Because the erotic romance is softcore pornography and the erotic romantic comedy is hardcore pornography (at least from the porn-chic era).
So, clearly, the film had the odds stacked against it. Well, it didn’t do much to allay my fears. Despite all claims of authenticity, the film still comes off as a masculine fantasy of female sexuality (a shortened version of this may have fit in well in Fucking Different). At about the two hour mark, a mouthpiece for the director mentions that men create art of the feminine form, because they yearn to experience feminine sexuality, a woman’s orgasm. I loved this line, because it placed the whole film into a context, but then something hit me: So, the film is not to blame for its “sins”, but do those sins disappear? If the work is not to blame, Kechiche still is. Kechiche’s ideology of how lesbianism works, the sexuality that takes over their lives, the constant, indiscriminate partner switching, the idea that all a gay woman needs is a good dicking, these are all ideas visible in the film and which must be placed upon someone.
Another sin in the film is a sin of filmmaking. Why do artists celebrate the female rapist? The first time I remember encountering this was in The Incredibly True Adventure of Two Girls in Love, where a teenage girl has a sexual relationship with a middle-aged woman and it is shown as beneficial. For some reason, lesbian relationships between underage girls and adult women are shown as a good thing more often than not. In this film, this relationship is portrayed (Emma is the sort of woman who seduces a high school student by showing up at her high school at the right time…Adele is 17, she is at least 21). The relationship is shown as being toxic, but it is difficult to tell if Kechiche himself believes that it is detrimental. Personally, as much as I like Lea Seydoux, I hated her character so much! She was a horrible, cruel, pretentious person who never seemed like she wanted to help Adele. All of this may be moot, however, if only for one point, a rather obvious one: I am not a lesbian! I attempt to question how realistic the relationship portrayed is, but I have never experienced this relationship, so maybe I cannot comment, but I would suggest that I have as much right to comment as Kechiche.
Despite all of that, I can’t say Blue is the Warmest Colour is a bad film. In fact, it’s quite great. What is it that makes it great, though? I can’t help but think that it’s a lot of small details. All of the beautiful close-ups. The constant noise pollution in the scene where Emma meets Adele’s parents. The metal on tooth sound whenever anyone eats spaghetti. A single sigh by Emma as she has her face buried in the side of Adele’s chest. The sight of Adele eating spaghetti early in the film, licking her utensils while her lips are smeared with pasta sauce, showing a young girl on her way to becoming a sexual woman, while still in a juvenile stage. In fact, if I may say so without sounding creepy, Adele Exarchopoulos’ mouth had me fixated throughout the film! Whenever she smiles, the lines around her lips and mouth come together to create a cartoonish smile, making her look all the more childish and innocent. Watch her mouth if and when you see the film and you’ll know what I mean.
The only way to conclude this is to say that Blue is the Warmest Colour fails as a romance, but it succeeds as a coming-of-age film, where a realization of human cruelty is a part of the realization involved in the coming of age.