reviews – Page 10 – Ripple Effects

Back to the Source: From Movie to Book

Those who have come to the pond here for a while would know I’m a Book to Movie person. If I know a film adaptation is coming out, I’d want to read the book first, as I’m always intrigued by the adaptation process. Maybe it’s the transposition of one art form into another that so fascinates me. Yes, you can say it’s a kind of theme and variation type of work.

But there are also times when I’m so captivated by a movie that, after watching it, I want to read the book on which it’s based. Thanks to Wes Anderson, I’m now reading Stefan Zweig.

Before watching The Grand Budapest Hotel last April, I had never heard of the Austrian novelist, playwright, journalist and biographer Stefan Zweig. During the 1920’s and 1930’s, Zweig was one of the most famous and translated writers. And yes, here I am living under a Rock(ies), have never heard of the name until Wes Anderson’s confessional interviews, wherein he raved about how his (now) Oscar winning Budapest Hotel was influenced by the writings of Stefan Zweig. Also in the movie, there is the acknowledgement of Zweig as the source of inspiration as the film’s end credits begin to roll.

Here’s what’s interesting: Instead of adapting from one single work, Anderson created his Budapest Hotel sparked by the oeuvre of Zweig’s after he read his writings only a few years before. After watching the film, I’ve since read several of Zweig’s short stories, and a couple of novellas The Post Office Girl and Chess Story, and now continue to delve into more of his captivating, often bittersweet, stories. Watch for my article coming out in the April (Spring) issue of Shiny New Books on how Z inspired A.

So The Budapest is the most recent example of how a movie influences my reading. Over the years, there have been other ones. Here are some more:

12 Years A Slave (2013) – Steve McQueen’s artistic rendering of slavery may seem like a paradox, but acclaimed British actor Chiwetel Ejiofor’s performance as Solomon Northup is what spurred me to read the original memoir. Both are excellent works.

3:10 to Yuma (2007) – Have you ever read a Western short story? Western as in uh… cowboy, gunslingers. This is one of the few Western work I’ve ever read. The intriguing moral dilemma the movie depicts and its poignant ending had driven me to look for the short story by Elmore Leonard as soon as I left the theatre.

Bleak House (2005) – The BBC TV mini-series with Gillian Anderson as Lady Dedlock, Anna Maxwell Martin as Esther Summerson sealed the deal for me. The series also introduced me to the talented Carey Mulligan, her first role I believe. I turned to the 1,000 plus pages Dickens novel soon after the series finished. Because I’ve seen it first, it was a breezy read, almost.

Howards Ends (1992) – A cast with Emma Thompson, Helena Bonham Carter and Vanessa Redgrave is not hard to move and entertain. And thanks to Merchant Ivory, the dynamic dual of producer/director, and their team writer Ruth Prawer Jhabvala, I devoured the humorous and equally entertaining E. M Forster novel after that.

Revolutionary Road (2008) – I was captivated by the movie at first. Kate Winslet and Leo DiCaprio had done a marvelous job in depicting the entrapment of suburban life. But only through reading Richard Yates’ book did I sense the even deeper psychological entanglement that I missed in the film.

The Diving Bell and the Butterfly (2007) – I wrote in my book review, “This is one book that should be read after watching the film. Without visualizing what Jean-Dominique Bauby had gone through after his massive stroke, the reader simply could not empathize or appreciate enough of Bauby’s effort in ‘writing’ his memoir.” How? One blink at a time.

When Did You Last See Your Father (2007) – I watched the film twice at TIFF a few years back, Colin Firth as British writer Blake Morrison and Jim Broadbent as his overbearing and critical father dying of cancer. The life-long yearning of a son seeking his father’s approval is so sensitively portrayed. Reading Morrison’s memoir after only made me appreciate the film more.

How about you? Are there movies that have motivated you to go back to the source and read the book?

***

(CLICK ON the links in the titles to read my reviews.)

87th Academy Awards Winners (2015)

Inconsistencies marked the awards show last night. The opening number was so fascinating that it had set a standard and expectation that could not be met for the rest of the evening, from Neil Patrick Harris’s jokes to the incredulous performance by Lady Gaga singing a medley from The Sound of Music. Was that just to open for Julie Andrew to come out to present the Best Original Score? As for NPH’s Birdman imitation game, the naked escapade was a little too desperate an attempt to shock. But his guessing game was mind boggling I must admit.

There were notable high points though, most memorable being the performance of the Oscar winning song ‘Glory’ by John Legend, Common, and a massive group of backup singers re-enacting a Selma scene. Tears rolled down the face of David Oyelowo’s who played Martin Luther King Jr. in the movie, and Chris Pine’s, who played… uh… Captain Kirk.

Speeches were heartfelt and imbued with family value. J. K. Simmons had set it off with a passionate plea for all to thank their parents, mothers, spouse, and children. Patricia Arquette brought the house down with her cry for equal work, equal pay for the females in the movie industry. Is she now considered a whistleblower? Meryl Streep and Jennifer Lopez almost jumped out of their seats with approval. Ironic to think that some of those applauding were the gatekeepers of the system.

Major winner was Birdman, grabbing all the most coveted prizes, albeit a let down for Michael Keaton. The Grand Budapest Hotel tied with Birdman in the number of Oscars won, the exact categories predicted in my review written in April last year. Just sayin’.

Boyhood only got one nod, a gem of a film that is the epitome of innovation, perseverance, and risk-taking. The fact that it has travelled so far all the way to Oscar night, thirteen years by now, is already an admirable success for the filmmakers and all involved, albeit I’d like to see them win a few more, especially for director Richard Linklater.

Excited to see Ida honoured as the Best Foreign Language Film of the year, and to hear director Pawel Pawlikowski’s take on the occasion: Ida was intended to be a quiet film of contemplation about withdrawing from the world, “and here we are at the epicenter of noise and attention. It’s fantastic. Life is full of surprises.”

CitizenFour won Best Documentary, deservedly. Director Laura Poitras had done an extraordinary job capturing (no pun intended; better than NPH’s ‘treason’) Edward Snowdon’s initial coming out with all the classified materials, filming his meeting with journalist Glenn Greenwald in a Hong Kong hotel room. Considering how the events unfolded later, these footage are now invaluable. The film is on my Top Ripples 2014 list.

Here are the major Oscar 2015 winners:

Birdman (4) – Best Picture, Directing, Original Screenplay, Cinematography.

The Grand Budapest Hotel (4) – Best Makeup, Costume Design, Production Design, Original Score.

Whiplash (3) – Best Supporting Actor J. K. Simmons, Film Editing, Sound Mixing

Boyhood (1) – Best Supporting Actress Patricia Arquette.

The Imitation Game (1) – Best Adapted Screenplay

The Theory of Everything (1) – Best Actor Eddie Redmayne

Still Alice (1) – Best Actress Julianne Moore

American Snipper (1) – Best Sound Editing

Selma (1) – Best Original Song ‘Glory’

Ida – Best Foreign Language Film

CitizenFour – Best Documentary

Interstellar – Visual Effects

For a complete list, CLICK HERE.

***

Click on the links to my reviews of Oscar Movies:

The Budapest Hotel: A Grand Escape

Whiplash: What Price Perfection?

Boyhood: The Moment Seizes Us

Ida’s Choice

Interstellar and Ida: The Sound and Silence of Exploration

Leviathan: The Beast Within Us

The Chinese have a saying – while we’re at foreign language films – ‘A tyrannical government is more ferocious than the tiger’. That Leviathan is selected as the official entry from Russia to the Oscar race baffles me. But I can also see those in power there just may not be bothered by small town corruptions which the film depicts, for they must be more focused on the larger picture that carries greater magnitude, the scenery in Crimea.

Leviathan, that monstrous beast the priest in the film quotes to the main character Kolya is from the book of Job in the Bible. While the context in the Biblical passage is about the Creator’s might over the huge creature, it is a metaphor with layered meaning in writer/director Andrey Zvyagintsev’s film: A citizen against a powerful mayor vying for his home property, and the monstrous beast inside the characters with which they all have to wrestle.

Kolya (Aleksey Serebryakov) is an apt parallel of a modern day Job in the sense of the misfortunes he encounters. The little guy is no match for a greedy and powerful mayor and a corrupt system when it comes to holding on to what he legally owns, his home on a piece of land by the shoreline in the coastal town of Pribrezhny. Even his lawyer friend Dimitry (Vladimir Vdovichenkov), who has come all the way from Moscow to advocate for him, falls victim to the small town mayor Vadim (Roman Madyanov).

The seemingly idyllic setting of Kolya’s coastal home is apparently an illusion. The cinematography is stunning and probing at the same time, for apart from the scenic serenity, there are also broken and derelict boats discarded on the shore, as well as carcasses of sea creatures, in particular, a whale-like skeleton that we the audience would gasp upon seeing but that the local residents don’t even take a second look. Their lives are intertwined with the Leviathan, however skeletal its remains.

But Kolya is not Job. He is hotheaded and impulsive. Apart from fighting the external beast of the mayoral hostile take-over of his home property, Kolya has to keep his wife Lilya (Elena Lyadova) at bay from his lawyer friend Dimitry, as well as bring up teenaged son Roman (Sergey Pokhodaev) on a path he himself is at a loss in finding. The worst is yet to come though. We empathize with Kolya, a man so trapped, he is unable to find a way out other than drowning his misery in alcohol. The church is not helping either, why, its most powerful congregation member is the mayor himself.

Too far and remote a film to identify? The setting maybe, but not the story. Leviathan resonates with the human condition it depicts, the Leviathans within us that we have to wrestle wherever we may be. Not just Kolya, but every character is crying for a redemptive way out of his or her predicament, unless blind as the mayor who basks in his own schemes. With the nuanced performance of the cast, we have the pleasure to appreciate a production superbly crafted, and that’s what gratifies when watching a film well made, despite the subject matter.

Leviathan has won 2014 Cannes Film Festival’s Best Screenplay Award, and last month the Golden Globe’s Best Foreign Language Film. This Sunday at the Oscars, Leviathan has a good chance of grabbing the coveted prize in its category, Best Foreign Language Film of the Year.

My pick? Still rooting for Ida, for its positive choice at the end.

~ ~ ~ 1/2 Ripples

***

My Reviews of 2015 Oscar Nominated Films:

Ida

Boyhood

The Grand Budapest Hotel

Whiplash

Gone Girl

Interstellar and Ida

Kingsman: The Secret Service

I started Proust’s The Guermantes Way a few months ago, still have some five hundred pages to go. So if I have two hours to spare, why do I not get back to it and make some headway, instead of going to the theatre to see Kingsman: The Secret Service on the first day of its screening?

For pure escape, of course. And then there’s the CF factor.

Yes, if the Colin Firth you have in mind is Mr. Darcy doing his graceful dive into the pond, you’re in for a big cognitive dissonance. Indeed, you can call this a paradigm shift for Colin Firth. He’s still a gentleman, mind you, dapper and poised, but he is one suave, choreographed fighting and killing machine, six month in the training, as he admitted in (real life) interviews.

British director Matthew Vaughn, who brought us Kick-Ass (2010) and X-Men: First Class (2011), had taken on adapting the Marvel comics created by Dave Gibbons and Mark Millar (Kick-Ass) by mashing fantasy and realism into one big action-packed, stylish, fun and at times farcical British spy adventure. The production is like an homage to Ian Fleming’s James Bond and all those in the secret intelligence service MI6, from Q to M.

But to evoke an even deeper root, The Kingsman is Arthur (Michael Caine) and his knights, Galahad (Colin Firth), Lancelot (Jack Davenport), and the mastermind Merlin (Mark Strong). A pure fantasy. Behind the facade of a tailor shop in London is the organization’s high tech base, and rightly so, for a gentleman’s suit is his armour, and the Kingsmen are the new knights.

Firth’s dapper presence is a prime model showing off the bespoke tailoring. What you see on screen you can also get, a collaboration of the film’s costume designer Arianne Phillips and the online retailer Mr. Porter. A Kingsman brand of wardrobe and accessories is the exclusive product spinoffs. Fantasy meets reality.

Not just a fashion statement though. What Galahad Harry Hart tells the young recruit Eggsy (Taron Egerton), who comes from a seedy part of London, records of petty crimes under his belt, raised by a single mother with an abusive boyfriend, all subsequent to the early death of his father, a former Kingsman: “Being a Kingsman has nothing to do with the circumstances of one’s birth; if you’re prepared to adapt and learn, you can transform.” After thinking a bit, Eggsy responds, “Like My Fair Lady.” If there’s any mindful lesson one can glean from watching this seemingly mindless entertainment, here it is.

Back to the task at hand. The dual plot lines are tightly woven as we see Eggsy going through a demanding training and screening process, at the same time Hart has to deal with the high tech villain cum philanthropist Richmond Valentine (Samuel L. Jackson). Valentine sees mankind as a virus. He has developed the means to eradicate the pests, from a mind-controlling implant to a free-for-all SIM card through which he can activate, gleefully watching people kill off each other.

Comic book clarity, black and white, no shades of grey. While the plot may be formulaic, there are special effects and production designs that are fresh and captivating. I particularly like the tailor shop cum secret organization lair, with its underground passageways, and yes, the neat arrays of wardrobe accessories that are lethal weapons in disguise.

As an R-rated movie, some scenes are demanding of the viewers, and in the genre of action/adventure/comedy, graphic violence is prolific. The church scene may not sit well with some, albeit the explanation of the carnage is offered only after the very long and deadly sequence. Valentine is playing God to control their minds and impulses. Despite its flaws, which are easily covered by the quick change of scenes, overall it is a well-paced, well-acted, and stylish production.

Music is prominent in conveying the spectacle and thrills, as well as humour. I chuckle when I hear the British composer Edward Elgar’s Pomp and Circumstance accompanying one of the explosive, climatic sequence at the end, the extravaganza of human heads turned fireworks, a good reminder and celebration of where all the fantasy of the gentleman spy originates.

As with a genre of this kind, the movie is not for everyone. If you can’t stand the sight of blood, or graphic violence, or hear the F word prolifically uttered, or are reluctant to let farcical surrealism override a rational mind, then maybe you’d like to stay home and attack your TBR pile of reads. Don’t bother flipping through the comic book either. As the bookstore clerk warned me when I asked about it, “It’s very graphic.”

And yet, the two hours of pure escapism has proven to be invigorating. I’m just about ready to get back to Proust.

~ ~ ~ Ripples

Paddington: The Marmalade to Spread on Your Day

What can a little bear from ‘Darkest Peru’ do to ease one’s tension, uplift a depressed mood, or simply elicit laughs out loud? Plenty. Paddington can do plenty of good for all of the above. I’d chosen the right film to come out of a stressful month.

Clever, fast-paced, passionate, and very funny, Paddington the movie is 95 minutes of pure delight. Although Michael Bond’s stories first came out in 1958, director and screenwriter Paul King has brought out some relevant, contemporary issues in his adaptation such as migrating to a new land, finding a home, striving to belong, accepting diversity, and basically the universal search for ways we can all live together despite differences.

The movie begins with a black-and-white old news reel. I like that already. An English explorer, Montgomery Clyde (Time Downie), heads over to ‘Darkest Peru’ and discovers a talking bear family. As he leaves, he urges them to visit London. After an earthquake that killed his Uncle Pastuzo (Michael Gambon, voice), the little bear (charmingly voiced by Ben Whishaw) is sent out by Aunt Lucy (voice of Imelda Staunton) to head for a new life in this believed-to-be-friendly London. To send him off, Aunt Lucy hangs a little sign with a string around his neck that says: “Please look after this bear. Thank you.”

And so the little stowaway with a suitcase full of marmalade hides on board a cargo ship and is transported to a foreign land where the Brown family finds him at Paddington Station. Thus his new name.

Despite the chaos that ensues in the Brown household, and the initial reluctance of Mr. Brown (Hugh Bonneville, who is like a Papa bear himself), and daughter Judy (Madeleine Harris, “So embarrassing!”), Paddington’s inept charm readily wins the heart of the enthusiastic Mrs. Brown (the always enthusiastic Sally Hawkins) and very friendly young son Jonathan (Samuel Joslin). Later, Paddington finally gains even the public’s favour with his serendipitous heroism on the streets of London.

Here is no place to argue against stock characters. Of course we need a villain; we have the parallel of Cruella De Vil of 101 Dalmatians in the form of Millicent, played by Nicole Kidman. I’m sure she enjoys doing that too. Driving a van that says Taxi when the sliding door is opened, she soon reveals herself a taxidermist when the door is closed. Good to see stars letting loose in non-typecast roles. Julie Walters and Jim Broadbent also present for you to discover. And if you know what the Paddington Bear author Michael Bond looks like, you can find him in cameo too.

Very well integrated are the effects of real-life, human actors interfacing with the animated bear and other cartoonish scenarios. Do we need to know how the technical genius behind the screen worked, how they used around 600 shots with bears, which required 350 people across two countries working on the visual effects for three years… to enjoy the film? Definitely not, maybe best we don’t go into the complexities of CGI’s, simulations, and yes, how to deal with fur. The final results are all what the technical team had striven for, delivering what they would like us to see. I can fully appreciate the effects. Kudos to them all.

It is definitely a snub Paddington doesn’t get an Oscar nomination, in any category. While in the land of its origin (England, not Peru), Paddington is nominated for two 2015 BAFTA Awards (The ‘British Oscars’): Best Adapted Screenplay and Best British Film. So I do hope the box office here can redeem the slight on this side of the Atlantic. Go see how the little bear and his new-found family can dispel your winter blues. Noms or no noms, this is a winner in my book.

As for that sign Aunt Lucy hangs around Paddington’s neck, we may need to heed it even more in this conflict-ridden world of ours:

“Please look after this bear. Thank you.”

~ ~ ~ 1/2 Ripples

***

Click on the link to the fascinating article in The Telegraph, Paddington: The technology behind the small bear from Darkest Peru.

Force Majeure (2014): Act of God or Act of Human

As I’m writing, this just popped up: Force Majerure (Sweden) is now one of nine films shortlisted for the Oscars Foreign Language Film category, advanced from the initial round with features from eighty-three countries. Soon, this list will be further shortened to make up the five nominees for the 87th Academy Awards. Nominations will be announced at 5:00 a.m. PT, January 15, 2015.

I watched Force Majeure at TIFF in September, a second time again this week as it comes to our local theatre. Please note, it is impossible to discuss this film in an intelligent manner without mentioning the storyline. Therefore, consider yourself warned. Spoiler Alert. But let me assure you, this won’t lessen your enjoyment of the movie; rather, it could prepare you for a more purposeful viewing.

‘Force majeure’ in translation means ‘an overwhelming and irresistible force’. Director Ruben Östlund tells his visual story based on this notion. A young family goes on a week of skiing holiday in the French Alps, a much needed family time as the husband has been busy at work. What is intended to be a fun family vacation is turned into something totally unthought of, making this one of the most original film ideas I’ve come across in years.

The slick and stylish camerawork begins with a close-knit family. Mom and Dad Ebba (Lisa Loven Kongsli) and Tomas (Johannes Kuhnke) look like a well-matched couple; their pair of school-aged children Vera (Clara Wettergren) and Harry (Vincent Wettergren) are smart and charming. All four of them sleep together on one King-sized bed in the resort hotel, wear the same style of underwear, brush their teeth in one accord, do everything together, until one split-second their view of each other is shaken to the core.

The ski resort conducts controlled avalanches to maintain the ski slopes. At lunch on the second day, the family sits at a table in the outside terrace, taking in the spectacular scenery. Suddenly a controlled avalanche is launched. At first, everyone is curious and excited, marvelling at the sight. But soon the avalanche appears too close for comfort. Panic begins to send people scattering away from their tables.

Ebba grabs her children, but with two of them, she looks for Tomas to help. Tomas in the mean time is nowhere to be found, for he is the first one to run away from their table. Sounds hilarious? The scenario can be quite comical actually, but that only sets the stage for a critical look at a marriage relationship, and with that, the duties, roles, and expectations of a husband and a father.

Director Östlund aptly presents to us a situation worthy of discussion. What deserves praise is the way he does it: with deadpan humour, slick editing, stylish cinematography and clever dialogues. The music motif captures the mood perfectly with excerpt from Vivaldi’s Four Season, where the intensifying summer storm brewing, and soon wreaks havoc on what could have been a perfect family holiday.

As Ebba relays the embarrassing episode to friends Mats and Fanny, superbly played by supporting actors Kristofer Hivju and Fanni Metelius, the scenario soon divides the two couples along gender lines, and divergent and conflicting views regarding male and female roles and dispositions ensue. Suppressed chuckles in the theatre could well be the intended effects by the director, but I couldn’t help but LOL at certain shots.

Tomas’s earlier denial is later dissolved into concession as he declares himself ‘a victim of his own instincts’. What an intriguing claim. Are we autonomous agents fully responsible for our own actions, or victims of our personality? I first thought the term Force Majuere refers to the avalanche, but as the story unfolds, I begin to see it as the force within, our innate nature, as Tomas puts it, the impulse that drives him to act a certain way. The term ‘controlled avalanche’ is perhaps the most intriguing oxymoron inferring to the nature of our behaviour.

The final act may look a little incompatible with the rest of the film. However, I feel it is a sensitive and nuanced depiction of this thing we can call ‘humanness.’ What’s joining us all is our frailty. A quote from another movie suddenly comes to mind: “The things that people in love do to each other they remember, and if they stay together it’s not because they forget, it’s because they forgive.”

An interesting scenario presented in a visually captivating and delightful cinematic offering. I hope Force Majeure will make it to the final cut in the Oscar race. And, my instinct tells me it just might.

~ ~ ~ 1/2 Ripples

***

Other Related Posts on Ripple Effects:

Ida’s Choice: Thoughts on Pawlikowski’s Ida

Tuffing it out at TIFF14

Top Ripples 2014

This year, I’ve watched over 100 films and in a much smaller proportion, read forty some books. Been to the Toronto International Film Festival, and attended a memorable session ‘Conversation with Juliette Binoche.’ That would be one of the Top Ripples for me.

The following list represents the most resonance I’ve had with the films that come out this year. As a stringent marker, I’ve only given one movie 4 Ripples, and that’s Boyhood back in August when I first saw the film. All the others earn at least 3.5 Ripples.

I’d not written a review for every film I’d seen, obviously. But even for those I did not post, I ensure you if you find them on this list, they are at least 3.5 to 4 Ripples in my mind, like Calvary, and Citizenfour. Of course, there are those that I’m still waiting to come out in the next two weeks. (Click on the links in the following titles to read my review.)

As you can see, other than films and books, I’ve also included some other memorable 2014 experiences.

Films

Boyhood

The Grand Budapest Hotel

Calvary

Citizenfour

Clouds of Sils Maria

Foreign Language Films

Ida

Force Majeure

Books – Fiction

Lila by Marilynne Robinson
(2014 National Book Award Finalist, Fiction)

The Goldfinch by Donna Tartt
(2014 Pulitzer Prize for Fiction Winner)

Books – Nonfiction

Age of Ambition: Chasing Fortune, Truth, & Faith in the New China by Evan Osnos
(2014 National Book Awards Winner for Nonfiction)

Birding with Yeats: A Memoir by Lynn Thomson

Gallery Visits

Alex Colville and the Movies (AGO)

Nature Sightings: (rare or first time sighting for me):

The Monarch Butterfly

The Barred Owl

Porky and Wess

Best Search Engine Terms to come to Ripple Effects:

Is Downton Abbey fiction?

There are also books and films from previous years that I’ve had the pleasure to experience in 2014. Here are the Top Ripples:

Books:

12 Years A Slave by Solomon Northup (1853)

Joseph Anton by Salman Rushdie (2012)

A House In The Sky by Amanda Lindhout (2013)

Silence by Shûsaku Endô (1966)

The Dinner by Herman Koch (2013)

Films:

The Lunchbox (2013)

Like Father, Like Son (2013)

Charade (1963)

I Confess (1953)

Shadow of a Doubt (1943)

Reading The Season: Lila by Marilynne Robinson

Every year before Christmas, I read something that can draw me closer to the meaning of the Season. Amidst the busyness of the festivities, I try to carve out a piece of quiet. I name these annual posts Reading The Season. You can click on the links at the bottom for previous entries, dating back to 2008. This year, the publication of Marilynne Robinson’s third Gilead book, Lila, is a most timely read.

Gilead (2004) – Marilynne Robinson’s Pulitzer Prize and National Book Critic Circle Award winning novel introduces us to the fictional town of Gilead, Iowa. We hear the gentle voice of the narrator, the ageing Rev. John Ames, as he writes a letter to his seven-year-old son Robby, leaving a legacy of family heritage, love, forgiveness, and serenity.

Home (2008) – Based on the same Gilead characters, but from a different point of view allowing us privy to the household of the Rev. Robert Boughton, John Ames’s life long-friend. Glory, Boughton’s daughter, comes home to take care of her ailing father. She is there when her brother Jack returns after an absence of twenty years. The black sheep of the family, Jack’s estranged self yearns for reconciliation like a prodigal. The book, in all its complexities and depiction of alienation, escape, return and lost yet again, suggests home may not be a solace as sweet as one hopes.

Lila (2014) – Robinson’s newest, and 2014 National Book Award finalist. It is the third novel based on the characters in the town of Gilead, offering yet another point of view. But one can just read it on its own, albeit best to have read Gilead first, then the kind face of John Ames can be conjured up more readily. In this book, the perspective is from Ames’s much younger wife Lila, at first lonely and desolate, slowly drifting into place.

Lila Dahl

At the outset, we see Lila as an unwanted child, “cold”, ‘all cried out’. She is rescued by Doll, a destitute woman herself yet still has room in her heart for an abandoned little girl. Doll wraps Lila into her shawl and decides to bring her up. “Lila was the loneliest child, and there they were, the two of them together, keeping each other warm in the rain.” Lila later takes up Doll’s name as Dahl.

The two joins a small group of itinerant field workers led by Doane, living in camps out in the open. But the Depression breaks up the cohesive work party. Lila is later left on her own and for a little while, works in a brothel in St. Louis. Knowing she can’t stay there for long, she slips out one night, escaping from a blackhole of hopelessness.

After that she finds herself a cleaning job at a hotel, from which she has to escape again after seeing her nemesis whom she first encounters while in the brothel. She packs her bag and leaves town, taking rides from strangers going to wherever they drop her. Ultimately, Lila drifts to the outskirt of Gilead, finds an abandoned shack and takes shelter there. She cleans up the shack for a place to sleep, having no plans except to find odd jobs in the town yonder, earn enough money, then moves on, maybe to Sioux City.

Lila lives a life of poverty, loneliness and fear, mistrusting everyone. Doll may have been like a mother to her but she too has her own rough life and struggles. Doll knifes and kills a man who might be Lila’s own father, could well be out of protecting Lila. She is later jailed, leaving the knife in Lila’s possession. Lila keeps it with her all the years as a memento, a murder weapon, yes, but also a symbol of Doll’s loving protection and Lila’s own desolate past.

One day walking into Gilead Lila stumbles into a church to escape the rain, that is the turning point of her life. She sees the old man at the pulpit, the Rev. John Ames, and, he sees her.

John Ames

We know a lot about Ames from Robinson’s first book of Gilead, set in the 1950’s. A Congregationalist pastor in the town, Ames is sixty-seven years old when he first meets Lila, “a big, silvery old man”. Coming from a family tradition of ministers, John Ames is a man with a pastor’s heart.

Ames has had his share of personal grief. He had to bear the death of his beloved wife of his youth and his newborn son as she died in childbirth. Such unspeakable pain he had shared with his best friend Robert Boughton, pastor of the Presbyterian church in Gilead.

Ames and Boughton have been life long friends. They share pastoring advice, discuss foreign policies, debate theological problems, and bear the burden of each other’s family woes. Boughton has his in his son Jack, who takes John Ames’s namesake.

After seeing Lila at the church as she comes in from the rain, Ames keeps her in his heart. Residents of Gilead befriend Lila, giving her jobs, welcoming her in their midst, but Lila is aloof and skeptical, an outsider still. Ames personally engages her to talk and to know her more. One day, he goes to seek her out at the shack. She sees him coming as she walks towards Gilead. There on the path he reaches out to her and promises marriage. An inexplicable love story takes shape.

Ames and Lila

“… the old man kept on courting her, like a boy, when she was hard and wary…”

After they are married, however incompatible it looks in Ames’s home, Lila still keeps Doll’s knife with her as a memento and as a symbol of her own tumultuous past, a part of herself. Ames is unperturbed. He lets her keep it, and he even uses it, taking it as a normal tool around the house. Total acceptance.

If condescension is present in the relationship, it is Ames who wants to learn from Lila. His utter humility is what moves her. Barely literate, Lila yearns to know about the Bible, study it and grasp its richness and meaning. They talk about the difficult books of Ezekiel and Job. Ames shares his thoughts about this elusive notion called existence, and listens attentively Lila’s perspective and experiences. Total respect.

Lila has questions rooted in her bitter past, the why’s of misfortunes, cruelty, and the hardships in life. She asks Ames with an inquiring heart. Ames, a pastor of many years, can find no easy answers. He ponders Lila’s queries, and readily and honestly admits his own limitations in knowing, while loving her all the more. Total humility.

Even after they are married, Lila sometimes still conjures up thoughts of leaving. Ames knows this and gives her the freedom:

… if you ever change your mind, I want you to leave by daylight. I want you to have a train ticket in your hand that will take you right where you want to go, and I want you to take your ring and anything else I have given you. You might want to sell it. That would be all right. It’s yours, not mine… ” He cleared this throat. “You’re my wife,” he said. “I want to take care of you, even if that means someday seeing you to the train.” He leaned forward and looked into her face, almost sternly, so she would know he meant want he said.

She chooses to stay, a genuine response to his love.

When I read the book, I see a tender love story between two utterly incompatible beings, like an allegory and a parallel of the Christmas story, how the Creator God reaches out to take our hand, initiating an unfathomable relationship. Love for the reason of pure love. An unlikely and inexplicable union.

The Christmas Story

I first felt a little uncomfortable about the obvious incongruous pairing of Ames and Lila, yet, their love relation comes to fruition, albeit looking tentative at first. The gap between Ames and Lila is just a crack in the pavement when compared to the abyss separating Creator God and His creation. I see Ames and Lila’s story as an allegory, if you will, a parallel, however meagre, illustrating the joining of two utterly disparate sides.

The essence of the Season is in the reaching out to bridge that huge chasm. As Ames and Lila’s newborn son at the end of the book is an evidence of their love, we too receives a child, born in a manger that day in Bethlehem, a sign of ultimate mending. Total reconciliation.

***

Other Reading the Season Posts:

2020: Jack by Marilynne Robinson

2019: A Hidden Life, a film by Terrence Malick

2018: Madeleine L’Engle’s Poem The Irrational Season

2017: A Wrinkle In Time by Madeleine L’Engle

2016: Silence by Shusaku Endo

2015: The Book of Ruth

2014: Lila by Marilynne Robinson

2013 Poetry by Madeleine L’Engle

2012: Surprised by Joy, C. S. Lewis

2011: Walking on Water, Madeleine L’Engle

2010: A Widening Light, Poetry by Luci Shaw

2009: The Irrational Season, Madeleine L’Engle

2008: The Bible and the New York Times, Fleming Rutledge

2008: A Grief Observed, C. S. Lewis

***

Whiplash (2014): What Price Perfection?

This is one movie Tiger Mom can wholeheartedly approve. There’s a line spoken by the critical-to-the-point-of-sadistic music teacher Mr. Fletcher:

“There are no two words in the English language more harmful than ‘good job.'”

In a sense, Whiplash can be taken as the dramatization of that Tiger Mom philosophy.

The 2014 Sundance winner is writer/director Damien Chazelle’s second feature. In Whiplash, which he also wrote, Chazelle tells a very original story, the training of a music student and the intense, ambivalent relationship between a mentor and his trainee. How far can a teacher go before crossing the line into abuse, however well the teacher’s intention to draw out the best from the student?

We see the tortuous journey a promising jazz drummer, Andrew (Miles Teller), has to embark on as he freshly enters the fictional Shaffer Conservatory of Music in NYC. I’m not in the position to say whether it indirectly reflects upon which music school, so I better not dwell on this further. But one thing I do agree is that, yes, the Western way is too full of praise. The pursuit of excellence is often replaced by that of fun, and complacency and self-satisfaction (to protect self-esteem) the stumbling block to improvement. Tiger Mom can attest to that too.

Andrew has all intentions to learn and master top notch drumming skills under the demanding tutelage of Fletcher. He doesn’t want to be just a good drummer, he wants to be great, and he is willing to pay the price to get there. Being selected to play in Fletcher’s studio jazz band is a coveted privilege, staying in there requires nothing short of the physical and mental endurance as required in a war zone.

Like the drill sergeant in Kubrick’s Full Metal Jacket (1987), yelling insults and putdowns at the young recruits, shattering egos and self-confidence, Fletcher keeps his players in shipshape form by ruthless coercion and intimidation. He demands perfection. J. K. Simmons is most impressive in his role as Fletcher. What a transformation to Mr. Hyde from the kind and loving Dad in Juno (2007). It is likely that he will have a place in the award nominations come the next two months.

Miles Teller as Andrew is equally tenacious. Thus we see a dynamic duo in contention, excellent acting from both. Teller may have lots of competition when it comes to a Best Actor nom, but he is still young and has fuel for miles to come. His drumming skills are impressive too, or is it the excellent camera and editing work?

The agile camera is effective in depicting the intensity of the relationship between Andrew and Fletcher, capturing the dramatic effects like a thriller, with manic drumming in impossibly fast tempo and the exasperating face of Andrew’s that exudes both anguish and determination. Seamless editing, gripping cinematography and sound are prominent elements that will likely be acknowledged at award noms.

What price perfection? What does a student have to do to gain acceptance and respect from his teacher, the one whose approval that matters most in his training?

What started off as realistic storytelling a la suspenseful drama in the first two acts begins to transform into a totally different genre more like magical realism in the final scenes. Like Gone Girl is a dramatic exaggeration of a marriage gone wrong, Whiplash is a hyperbole of a troubled teacher/student relationship taken to the extreme.

How to get to Carnegie Hall is not only by way of practice, practice, practice, but also entails plenty of blood, sweat, and tears. We see the free flow of all the above in the movie.

Despite my reluctance to fully embrace the ending sequences, I have thoroughly enjoyed the movie. A very original story idea well executed as a suspense thriller, add in some fine jazz music and mood setting technical effects, Whiplash is an impressive production from a young writer/director with great potential. I can’t help but wonder if there’s any real life similarity between him and his protagonist.

~ ~ ~ Ripples

Awards Update:

Feb. 22, 2015: J. K. Simmons wins Best Supporting Actor Oscar. Also wins Oscar in Sound Mixing, Editing.

Feb. 21, 2015: J. K. Simmons wins Best Supporting Actor at the Independent Spirit Awards.

Feb. 8, 2015: 3 BAFTA wins for Best Supporting Actor, Editing, Sound.

Jan. 15, 2015: 5 Oscar noms for Best Picture, Best Supporting Actor, Best Original Screenplay, Best Editing, Best Sound Mixing.

Jan. 11: J. K. Simmons wins Golden Globe

Dec. 11: J. K. Simmons gets Golden Globe nom for Best Supporting Actor

Dec. 10: J. K. Simmons gets SAG nom for Best Supporting Actor

Dec. 7: J. K. Simmons wins Best Supporting Actor at the L.A. Film Critics Awards

Dec. 1: J. K. Simmons wins Best Supporting Actor from the New York Film Critics Circle

Whiplash has received 4 Film Independent Spirit Award nominations including Best Feature, Best Director, Best Supporting Actor (J. K. Simmons), and Best Editing.

Before I Go To Sleep (2014): Movie or Book?

Spoiler Alert: This post may contain information that one could deem spoilers, and, not just for this movie but for the other one, yes, you guessed it, Gone Girl.

If as some say Gone Girl is misogynist, then Before I Go to Sleep is the counter argument. Why of course, there’s a 50/50 chance that the villain is the female or the male character, and in some cases, both. And if it’s both, does that make the movie misanthropic?

So much about our humanity, which is what these crime suspense thrillers are all depicting, albeit in a more exaggerated way. Here is the movie adaptation of the very popular debut novel written by British writer S. J. Watson. Again, allow me to answer a question up front, book or movie first?

I know, there’s a likely chance that you have no intention to touch either, but here’s just an interesting thought, especially with the Gone Girl phenom still rippling. For this one, I’d say read the book first, mainly because if one goes to the movie unprepared, one would likely find the premise preposterous. A woman waking up every morning with no memory? But actually there are real-life cases which the author mentions in the epilogue of the book.

On the last page Watson notes that his novel, though totally fictitious, is inspired by actual medical cases, particularly that of Clive Wearing‘s, the British musicologist, conductor and BBC music producer, who has the same amnesiac condition, albeit his is an even shorter memory span, just a short minute or so.

Before I Go To Sleep is about a woman Christine (Nicole Kidman) who wakes up every morning with a total blank, forgetting who or where she is, and not knowing the person lying beside her in bed. He happens to be her husband Ben (Colin Firth), who has to explain to her every morning and reminds her who she is, and that an accident occurred fifteen years ago when she was 25 had left her in a state of amnesia with just a day’s memory span, but no matter, he tells her that he loves her.

Actually quite an interesting premise for a suspense thriller, the amnesiac as a vulnerable, ready victim. To add to the mystery, Christine receives a phone call from a Dr. Nasch (Mark Strong) every morning after Ben leaves the house for work. He tells her he has been helping her and gets her to look for a camera in a shoe box hidden inside her closet. In there she can replay what she has recorded the night before, bits and pieces of her memories.

The movie is a graphic and more suspenseful enactment of the novel, directed by Rowan Joffe, who had written the screenplay and directed Graham Greene’s Brighton Rock (2010). But I had found impressive his screenplay for The American (2010) which, under the direction of Anton Corbijn (A Most Wanted Man, 2014), is one of the rare spy thriller that is soulful. Come to think of it, I can’t help but think such a collaboration, Joffe screenplay, Corbijn directs could have made Before I Go To Sleep a better movie.

As I had mentioned in my review of the novel Before I Go To Sleep, the major flaw of the book is that the author forgets that it’s his character who has amnesia, not his readers. So every chapter starts off with her reading more or less the same journal entry she wrote the night before is a bit too tedious.

Such a condition has been improved in the movie by Joffe, and with the convincing performance by Kidman, we are made sympathetic observers instead of being bored by the repetition. A video camera to jot her memory is also a better way to capture visual anguish than reading from a journal. Making the film more interesting than the novel are the flashbacks Christine has, the bits and pieces that she remembers. But then again, are those real memories or fragments of her imagination?

Colin Firth has shattered his Mr. Darcy persona for good. It is still a pleasure to watch him, albeit Darcy devotees and purists may find some scenes uncomfortable, faced with the revelation that O, Colin Firth is an actor, an impressive one yes, but not the real Mr. Darcy they love to keep in their memory.

This is a second partnership between Firth and Kidman, shortly after The Railway Man (2013). Their next collaboration will be the upcoming film Genius (2015), another book to movie adaptation to watch for.

Mark Strong is probably one of the most underrated actors today. He has been in so many movies, delivering strong performance… Zero Dark Thirty (2012), Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (2011), plus many others and dating back to 1997, with Colin Firth in the first Fever Pitch (1997). Further, he’s my favourite Mr. Knightley in Emma (TV, 1996). His upcoming work is on my must-see list: The Imitation Game (2014).

Book to movie, here’s one that I have to say, I’ve enjoyed the movie more than the book, albeit it’s nothing more than leading and misleading, and slow revealing until the climatic end. Again I note, as with others of the crime and suspense genre, it’s not for everyone. But like Gone Girl, it has shoved to the forefront, domestic violence or violence of any sort involving the betrayal of trust, manipulation and self-gratification in dominance. Fortunately, this movie has a happier ending.

~ ~ 1/2 Ripples

***

Related Reviews on Ripple Effects:

Before I Go To Sleep by S. J. Watson Book Review

Gone Girl The Movie (2014)

The Railway Man Movie Review (2013)

The Railway Man Book Review

The Gone Girl Ripples: Binge-Watching Hitchcock

Caution: This post may contain SPOILERS, depending on how your imagination works.

“If you want to analyze everything in terms of plausibility then you end up doing a documentary.” – Alfred Hitchcock

Alfred Hitchcock is the best person to defend any outrageous act in a movie, and I’m thinking here about the one in the last section of Gone Girl, the altered scene that is different from Gillian Flynn’s book.

After watching the movie, something drove me back to Hitchcock. So in the past week, I’ve binge-watched all the Hitchcock thrillers that I could find, over half a dozen. Three of them I will discuss here, for they are like prototypes of Gone Girl. I’m sure both Flynn and Fincher have had the master’s influence silently creeping up their spine.

Surprisingly, the most obvious element common in these Hitchcock films is light-hearted humour, which I didn’t find in Gone Girl. Some dialogues are LOL funny. Crime and suspense can happen side by side with laughter; good and evil indwells at the same time. It is like Hitchcock is asking how can we separate these two sides of human nature?

And a common setting of these stories? Right within a marriage and the family.

Suspicion (1941)

This is the film that’s closest to Gone Girl‘s first part. Joan Fontaine won the Best Actress Oscar with her role as the naive but devoted Lina as she falls for the suave and charming Johnnie played by Cary Grant. They get married shortly after they meet. As the film progresses, Lina suspects her husband more and more. Hitchcock tells the story from Lina’s point of view, dropping clues so we are as suspicious as Lina. Despite his outward charm, Johnnie could just be a scoundrel after her rich father’s money.

With this suspicion in mind, a glass of milk can be seen as poison. Here is an unforgettable shot as we see Johnnie walks up the long flight of stairs holding the healthy drink on a platter, now perceived (by us, as directed by Hitchcock) as poison.

Without spilling any spoilers, I read that Hitchcock’s own preferred ending is different from what the audience see in the eventual cut released on screen. Who can mess with Cary Grant’s good guy image? Not even the master himself.

~ ~ ~ Ripples

Strangers On A Train (1951)

Two people unknown to each other meet on a train. One is a tennis star Guy Haines (Farley Granger) and the other a psychotic misanthrope Bruno Anthony (Robert Walker), who suggests they crisscross two murder schemes: he kills Guy’s wife so the tennis pro can marry his lover, and Guy kills Bruno’s father whom the son loathes. At his stop, Guy gets off the train taking the conversation with this stranger as a joke, and forgetting his initial-inscribed lighter on the compartment table.

So the one who takes this plan seriously goes ahead and follows through, while the other is drawn into a crime being the prime suspect. When Guy refuses to carry out his part, Bruno goes back to the crime scene so he can plant the lighter there to incriminate Guy. Here we can see Hitchcock’s signature style in extending his suspense in the most mundane act. As he is heading over there, Bruno drops Guy’s lighter through the grills of a street sewage hole. The camera closes up on a frantic hand stretching as far into the hole as possible to retrieve the lighter lodged in there. This is the kind of shots that could lodge in our memory even after we forget the whole storyline.

No matter how suspenseful and wicked the plot, Hitchcock’s movies are fun to watch. The key person to suspect something is wrong is usually a minor character, a younger sister with thick glasses, brainy, observant. We find her here as Guy’s lover Ann’s younger sister Barbara, played by the director’s own daughter Patricia Hitchcock.

The noir writer Raymond Chandler adapted Patricia Highsmith’s first novel of the same name. Those who think black-and-white movies dating back sixty years could not possibly be as entertaining as what we have today must see this one.

~ ~ ~ 1/2 Ripples

Shadow of a Doubt (1943)

Still earlier, seventy years ago, the Pulitzer winning playwright and novelist Thornton Wilder was one of three co-writers of the screenplay based on a short work by Gordon McDonell, who won the Best Writing Oscar for his original story.

Again, the setting is quiet small town America, Santa Rosa, where nothing happens much. That’s the ironic setting at the beginning of the film when Young Charlie (Teresa Wright), the eldest girl in a ‘typical’ family, lying on her bed, lamenting the boredom of suburban living. She suddenly thinks of an idea that would make her day.

So Young Charlie springs up and heads to the telegram office to send a message to her favorite relative Uncle Charlie (her namesake, played by the ubiquitous Joseph Cotton), her mother’s younger brother, a charmer living in NYC, urging him to come visit them. While there, Mrs. Henderson hands her a telegram from her Uncle Charlie that says he’s coming to visit them in a couple of days.

Young Charlie is elated. Here’s the following conversation she has with Mrs. Henderson:

Young Charlie: Mrs. Henderson, do you believe in telepathy?

Mrs. Henderson: Well, I ought to. That’s my business.

Young Charlie: Oh, not telegraphy. mental telepathy. Like… well, suppose you have a thought, and suppose the thought’s about someone you’re in tune with. Then across miles, that person knows what you’re thinking and answers you. And it’s all mental.

Mrs. Henderson: I don’t know what you’re talking about. I only send telegrams the normal way.

It’s this kind of unexpected pleasantries that make Hitchcock films so enjoyable, even in the midst of crime and suspense. As we would soon see, young Charlie has a crush on her Uncle Charlie. But that’s just the beginning of the film, and we soon find Uncle Charlie just may not be what he seems to be.

Young Charlie: … we’re not just an uncle and a niece. It’s something else. I know you. I know that you don’t tell people a lot of things. I don’t either. I have a feeling that inside you somewhere, there’s something nobody knows about.

Uncle Charlie: Something… nobody knows?

Young Charlie: Something secret and wonderful and… I’ll find it out.

Uncle Charlie: It’s not good to find out too much, Charlie.

Young Charlie: But we’re sort of like twins. Don’t you see?

These dialogues sum up the premise of the movie Gone Girl 70 years later. How much do we know about another person, even if that person is one of our family. How can one get inside the head of another and read the mind? There can be dark secrets within the mind that knowing them may endanger the one who discovers them.

The setting is similar too, a sleepy, innocent American small town and a newcomer from NYC. Good and evil are like twins, they lie obliviously beside each other.

Hitchcock is such a brilliant creator of suspense. Even just with young Charlie rushing through busy streets to get to the library before it closes at 9 pm keeps me on the edge of my seat, for I want to know if she makes it before it closes since she needs to find the missing newspaper page her Uncle Charlie is trying to throw away. What’s on there that he needs to hide it from her family?

Exactly, you have to run to the library to find yesterday’s paper to read on a piece of news story. That’s filmmaking dating back 70 years, but no less suspenseful and thrilling. Well, the library just closed as she gets there, but after knocking on the door, the librarian lets her in, scolds her a little then gives her three minutes to find what she needs.

As the camera zooms in, we finally see the news on the page: the nationwide search for the Merry Widow Murderer.

~ ~ ~ ~ Ripples

Filmmaking techniques have advanced unimaginably since Hitchcock’s time, yet after changes and changes, we are more or less the same, and films remain one of the most agile means to expose and entertain all in one shot.

To Read my review of Gone Girl the movie, CLICK HERE.

Like Father, Like Son (2013): Parent and Child Reunion

I had wanted to see this Japanese film since it came out last year. Missed it at TIFF13 last September, its North American premiere after winning the Cannes Film Festival’s Jury Prize in May. Glad it has finally arrived on Netflix, reaching a much wider audience than just festival goers, deservedly.

Director Hirokazu Kore-eda wrote the screenplay based on a disturbing premise: what if after six years of raising your son, the hospital where he was born contacted you and told you that your child was switched at birth, and of course, they sent their apology.

The hospital officials do not take this lightly. DNA tests are done to confirm. They have a lawyer with them, arrange to have you meet the other parents, mediate and ease the proposed switch back, which they recommend with a six-month preparation period, preferably before the boys start grade one in school. They even find out who the nurse is that made the error; due to her own frustrations at the time she knowingly made the switch. Of course, she is deeply sorry for what she had done and duly prosecuted. Monetary compensations are arranged.

But all the above have absolutely nothing to do with easing the shock and alleviating the trauma afflicted upon the families. Formality and legality do not soothe the pain; apologies and money cannot compensate for the abrupt termination of relationships.

Director Kore-eda has treated the subject matter with much tenderness and charm. The cinematography is stylish, the children and adults are all captured in a realistic manner with splashes of endearing humour.

The two families come from very different social strata, and the two boys have been raised in opposite parenting styles. Interestingly, only one of the families seems to take this news much harder. Ryota Nonomiya (Masaharu Fukuyama) is a successful professional who spends most of his time in the glass towers of Tokyo busy at work. His son Keita (Keita Nonomiya), an only child, is raised in a protective environment. Mother Midori (Machiko Ono) is loving but also ambivalent about a husband who puts his career over his family.

The other family is a shop owner in a rural part of the country, their son Ryusei (Shôgen Hwang) is the eldest of three children. Father Yudai Saiki (Rirî Furankî) is every child’s dream. He spends his days playing with his children, fixes their toys, and exerts no rules, albeit Mom Yukari (Yoko Maki) might wish he could have spent more time working.

What makes a father? What makes a son? Fatherhood and bloodline tend to supersede all other factors in a patriarchal society like Japan. But the film reflects the point of view that not all families necessarily embrace such a value. Further, apparently there are different parenting styles even in a homogeneous Japanese society.

If there is ever a Japanese version of the movie Boyhood as we have seen here from Richard Linklater, Hirokazu Kore-eda would be the ideal person to direct it. Like Father Like Son follows his previous work I Wish (2011) in its sensitive and incisive depiction of a boy’s heart and yearning. He can tear apart the facade of societal formality–but in a most tender way–and lay bare the hopes and needs, the essence of parents child relationships.

I must give credits to Johann Sebastian Bach, and the late Canadian pianist Glenn Gould. The beginning of Bach’s Goldberg Variations has been used in numerous films, but every time the soulful slow moving piano melody comes out, I am moved, no matter how many times I’ve heard it, and in so many different genres of films. Just from memory, I can think of The English Patient (1996), Hannibal (2001), Shame (2011). It is so effective in augmenting cinematic moments without becoming clichéd.

Here, the Aria is well placed as director Kore-eda uses it as a motif to spur us into deeper thoughts. What makes a father, a son? What is more important, blood or relationships? What is the role of a wife and mother in a patriarchal society? What is the purpose of giving birth and bringing up a child? What is fulfilling and meaningful to us as human beings? Indeed, a motif that can strike a universal chord of resonance that transcends cultures.

~ ~ ~ 1/2 Ripples