There are only four picks left in my
award-winning “Best Of The 2010s” series and I have to be honest
with you now. Three of them have appeared on quite a few other lists.
I never claimed to be a contrarian, not in the last few hours anyway.
My selection for the fourth spot, however, was somewhat less than
universally praised.
“mother!” captures the
gut-wrenching terror of sharing your art with the public, that
horrible moment of letting your personal creation go. Even the people
who love it (or claim they love it) won't understand it quite the way
you do. And as your precious creation gets passed around, cherished
or ignored or just briefly sampled as a mid-day distraction, there's
a good chance it will get torn to bits, and perhaps you along with
it. Yet you continue to create because you don't have any other
choice. And it's still better than having nobody else ever see your
work at all. Maybe.
“mother!” is a strident
environmental allegory. If Jennifer Lawrence is mother! Earth (which
she is, among so many other things) we first meet her in her Edenic
home with only one other person in sight, her husband/partner Him
(Javier Bardem). One stranger intrudes and then another and soon the
world population explodes. And damn near every one of these bastards
likes to party too, exploiting Mother Earth and her beautiful house,
all without considering her opinion on the matter or worrying about
wrecking the place, right up until the inevitable Malthusian crash,
and the grueling cleanup of the filth they leave behind.
“mother!” vividly depict systemic
misogyny stemming from multiple sources, from Christian patriarchal
ideology to the pernicious myth of the lone genius male artist and
his disposable muse. Maybe she'll be venerated as a saint later, but
that's cold comfort to an abandoned Jennifer Lawrence as mother!
Mary, valued primarily for her ability to produce one very special
baby, or perhaps to help Him publish his latest work and soak up all
the glory.
Like Hans Moleman's celebrated “Man
Getting Hit By Football” Darren Aronofsky's gonzo screed works on
so many levels, and I love, love, love this movie from its lower-case
“m” to its ostentatious ! As manic as the film gets at its
overcrowded crescendo, Aronofsky and crew frame most of the action
with a handful of simple, repeated camera setups, making it a more
controlled and rigorous formal exercise than the legions of skeptical
critics have given it credit for.
Because this movie really works on so
many levels, at least for me. One of the defining elements of my
dreams is that I'm rarely able to make a difference – scrub that
stain but it never goes away, shovel that coal but the pile never
gets any smaller. Maybe that's just me, but “mother!” captures
the feel of my dreams in a way I've never seen in a movie before, and
I'm especially thinking of the sequence where Lawrence implores
raucous party-goers to stop bouncing on her sink, only to find them
back at it just seconds later. And I haven't even talked about how
this movie so clearly sees the world through the eyes of an introvert
for whom true hell is other people.
Lawrence is great. Michelle Pfeiffer is
great. I think everything about “mother!” is great. I gave
serious thought to making it my top pick of the 2010s. Maybe I
chickened out because of the negative reviews, some of which I
respect but simply disagree with. I'm grateful that Aronofsky didn't
chicken out, and went for broke in every frame of this deranged
tour-de-force.
“The Turin Horse” was billed at the
time as Hungarian master Bela Tarr's last film, and so far that's
proven to be true as far as feature films go, except for the fact
that most critics (myself included) omitted the fact that the film
was co-directed (and edited) by Agnes Hranitzky, also the co-director
w/Tarr of “Werckmeister Harmonies” (2000) and “The Man From
London” (2006). If it really is the last feature film for either
director, they sure proved they can throw one hell of a farewell
party.
An elderly peasant and his daughter
live it up on the old farm where they get to stare at dust clouds
through the living room window and eat all the boiled potatoes they
could ever want, provided they only want one each. Feel the
excitement! The film, photographed in a stark black-and-white that
wallows in the tedium, unfolds at the pace of a day per act, though
these might well be Biblical days that stretch out for eons. Or
perhaps longer for the poor viewer who doesn't dig the glacial rhythm
or the nihilistic vibe.
Soon enough it becomes apparent that
the world is ending, though it's hard to tell for certain over the
constant howl of the scouring wind. Fortunately the starch-fed
protagonists have low expectations for life. When the light, possibly
all the light in the world, goes out, the daughter responds with a
resigned, “What's all this?” Few films grind more mileage out of
a black screen. Each day of Tarr's slow-motion apocalypse yields to a
slightly degraded copy of the day prior, bits and shreds of existence
flaking off until finally there's just not enough energy left to
sustain life, or even a film.
I also think “The Turin Horse” is
damn funny at times, but I've been told by reliable sources that
means I'm crazy. Tarr has described the film as an expression of “the
heaviness of human existence” and, really, what could be funnier
than that?
No comments:
Post a Comment