Brazil (1985)

 

Brazil

It is possible to see a trend in the production of Terry Gilliam from his work with Monty Python to his movies in the eighties. What starts out as silly, anarchistic sketches, takes on an increasingly acerbic character in the Monty Python movies until by the time of Brazil there is a bitterness that is oddly at conflict with the comedy and makes for an uneasy combo. As a long time Python fan, it hurts saying it, but I was not greatly pleased with Gilliam’s “Brazil”.

“Brazil” takes place in a strange nightmarish world and more than anything, it is this world which is the main character of the movie. It is the unholy love child of a threesome of runaway bureaucracy, totalitarianism and consumerism. A system where everybody is a slave to forms, procedures and files, where the individual influence and power is zero and where the only thing anybody cares about is buying and credit ratings. This is a highly technical world where nothing, least of all the technology, works. It was likely all the things Gilliam hated, ramped up to eleven.

This world is both wildly scary and comically stupid. This is the Crimson Permanent Assurance setting sail on the high seas of finance as a pirate ship absurdity, but without the gleam in the eye. The elite are wearing shoes for hats and killing themselves with unnecessary plastic surgery, but it is not funny. Robert De Niro has a small role as the pirate heating engineer, Tuttle, who fears for his life when fixes the mess of the Central Services clowns. The Innocent Mr. Buttle is arrested instead of Tuttle because a bug messed with the printer and now he is tortured to death while the system is concerned that Mrs. Buttle was overcharged for the arrest. On paper hilarious but actually frightening in its inhuman brutality.

Through all this we follow Sam Lowry (Jonathan Pryce), a lowly office worker with a well-connected mother who wants him to advance, mostly to make her look good. Lowry is quite good at his work, but with no ambition of his own. That change when he recognizes a woman from his dreams, the truck driver Jill Layton (Kim Greist). In his dream, he is a winged, angel-like hero, rescuing a damsel in distress from her demonic captors. A dream which is throughout recognized by various renditions of the classic theme of “Brazil”.

The dream and Sam’s reality starts to merge when he learns that Jill is now hunted by the authorities, simply for embarrassing them. It becomes Sam’s real-life mission to save Jill as he saves the girl in his dream and soon they are on the run from the stormtroopers of the bureaucracy.

Everything in “Brazil” extends into the surreal, even Sam’s chase. There is a clear indication that eventually he turns mad and in this dream state his life starts making more sense than the reality he left.

I want to like all the dark humor, all the absurd notions and curious references, such as the Stairs of Odessa, but the bitterness is so overwhelming that the absurdity becomes scary rather than fun. The cleaner who keeps on cleaning in the middle of a shootout, the torturer playing with his little girl, the bureaucrat asking the wife of the arrested man for signatures in triplicates for the receipt of the arrest. It is all so brutal that it is just not that fun anymore.

Apparently, the audience at the time was also rather confused about the movie and it did not do that well. I can see that. While it is long, it has nothing to do with that. Even the confusing plot cannot entirely be blamed. I think it rests with the level of bitterness projected here. This is the helpless feeling of being a dehumanized victim of an uncaring bureaucracy. Not fun, just absurd and maddening.

I wonder what the system had done to Terry Gilliam.

     

The Time to Live and the Time to Die (Tong Nien Wang Shi) (1985)

 

The Time to Live and the Time to Die

When I lived in China, I learned a word, or maybe an expression, that went “Ha-bah” (probably the female form). I understood it as meaning “okaaayy... whatever” and we used it ourselves whenever we had not clue what was going on, which was something that happened daily. “Ha-bah” is exactly what comes to mind when I think of “The Time to Live and the Time to Die”.

I did not understand much of what was happening and even less of what was the point of the movie, so forgive me if I am vague in my description of it.

We are in Taiwan shortly after the Second World War. The family we are following came from mainland China and sort of expect to go back. Wikipedia names one of the children, who seem to go by the name Ah-ha, as the character we follow, but you could have fooled me. There is a father in poor health who die early on, a mother who dies fairly late and a grandmother who dies in the end. I have no clue how many children there are. It could be anything between two and five and do not ask me about their names or what actor played which of them.

The family have limited funds, the house is shabby and while the children are supposed to study hard, the boy(s) seem to be mere street hoodlums.

Time passes, the parents die, and the children grow older and that is about it.

Of course, this takes place over two hours plus, so it is kind of slow motion, but mostly it is the same happening again and again.

This does not mean this movie is entirely uninteresting, because we do get a view into an ordinary family’s life. Small worries, big worries, some shouting, eating, bathing and whatever it is people are doing. I am not certain I have ever gotten so close to a Chinese family life before, although walking on the back streets in Shanghai you do get glimpses of lives you would not otherwise know. I am not certain this voyeur look is enough to keep you interested for two hours, but as I had no clue what was supposed to be happening, I had plenty of time to look at details, such as the rice mats, the bathroom and the half-outdoors kitchen.

Director Hou Hsiao-hsien’s style is compared to Japanese Ozu with his static camera and passive view on what is happening in front of the camera, and it may be Hou is using some of the same techniques, but I think the major difference is that in Ozu’s static view, interesting things were playing out and I was able to decode them. In Hou’s view, whatever is going on is simply not that interesting.

There is of course the very likely explanation that I simply have not understood the movie and that this all is in fact very deep and groundbreaking. I cannot rule out that I am simply too stupid for this movie or too uninterested in Ah-ha’s life and that is my personal failing. With that in mind I think I will leave it there.

Ha-bah.

Den kroniske uskyld (1985)

Off-List: Den kroniske uskyld 

The third off-List movie of 1985 is a Danish movie, “Den kroniske uskyld”, which IMDB translates to “The Chronic Innocence”. It is based on a book by author Klaus Rifbjerg and was a big hit in Denmark when it came out in 1985.

Janus (Allan Olsen) and Tore (Tjhomas Algren) are in their senior year in high school (or the Danish equivalent). Tore has returned from a period living in Jutland and has resumed his role as central character among his friends. Janus is the classic follower, the squire of the knight and generally allows Tore to lead the way.

One of the first things that happens after his return, is that a new girl is showing up. Helle (Simone Bendix) is very pretty and both boys are knocked off their feet. At the high school party, it is clear that it will be Tore and Helle that will be the couple, and Janus who gets the ungrateful role as friend. Being, as he is, always close to Tore, Janus becomes a very close witness to their relationship. Janus is also our narrator and mixed in with the story of Helle and Tore, we clearly sense his own frustration. Something he takes out on the willing, but not very cultured, Inger (Helle Fastrup).

The real monster here, though, is Helle’s mother, Mrs. Junkersen (Susse Wold, whose character never gets a first name). Already when we get the first glimpse of her, there is something sinister about her. Janus learns that she has previously taken over her daughter’s boyfriends and it is clear that Helle is reluctant to introduce Tore to her mother. To no avail, Mrs. Junkersen introduces herself and quickly takes the lead. It is obvious that she is very wealthy, gets what she wants, and is enjoying being admired. Think of a Mrs. Robinson as a spider queen, playing with and eating her prey.

Tore is blind to all this, but Janus sees it and is scared. Never mind his own jealousy, when he sees what Mrs. Junkersen is after he gets worried and protective of his friends.

The story climaxes at the graduation party in the house of Mrs. Junkersen. Here she goes all out vamp, and Tore does not stand a chance with tragic results.

Despite moments of humor this is a fairly downbeat affair. We know already going in of an impeding doom, we just do not know how bad things get. If you are looking for a silly happy ending movie, this is not the one. Yet, this is also a sort of coming of age story, as most teenage stories are. It is a bitter lesson and a brutal innocence lost. In fact, this is less about growing up than of losing innocence. Janus is experiencing his own anger, frustration, fear, jealousy and worst of all a meanness in himself. But he also loses his naivete concerning his friends and their parents. He ends up wiser on himself and other people, while some of the others succumb.

This all sound gloomy, and I suppose it is, but there are also a number of highlights that make the movie easier to watch. For me, this was a window into familiar places 40 years ago. The music was precisely the music we heard at parties back then. The cloth, the jargon, it is all very familiar. Imagine you could buy a pint size plastic cup of tap beer for 20 kroner, yes, I remember that even though it would be a handful of years before I would buy that myself. When they go around in Copenhagen, I recognize the places and so much look the same. It brings it all very close    

There is also a lot of joviality between the adolescents, the banter is fun and the relationship between Helle and Tore is beautiful, even if it feels unfair that it is pretty boy Tore who gets the pretty girl.

I actually never watched “Den kroniske uskyld” before now and it is sort of a miss. I guess I feared it would be a rough ride, and it is, but it is also one of those movies I am happy to have watched.

Back to the Future (1985)

 

Tilbage til fremtiden

“Back to the Future” is one of the really big movies. One of those everybody knows and many, if not most, love. I have watched it countless times, I know all the lines, have found lots of the easter eggs and can go into a heated discussion on timelines and paradoxes. So, yeah, I am a bit nerdy on this one, but so are tons of people. Just look at the Wikipedia page. I do not think even the Star Wars page is as big and detailed as this one.

If you need a plot summary for this one, I really think you are reading the wrong blog, but very briefly: Marty McFly (Michael J. Fox) is a high school kid who is friends with an inventor called Dr. Emmet Brown (Christopher Lloyd). Marty plays guitar, drives around on a skateboard and is late for school and thus a very relatable character for teenagers. Doc Brown is this white-haired, wild-eyed manic type that makes him the quintessential mad scientist. Also, Doc Brown has made a time machine... out of a DeLorean.

To power the flux-capacitor (that makes time travel possible) it needs a phenomenal amount of energy, 1.21 GW to be exact (or the amount of power produced by 121 big offshore wind turbines on full load). Luckily plutonium does the trick. Unluckily, the Libyan terrorists who provided the plutonium were not so pleased with the nuclear bomb full of pinball machine parts Doc Brown made for them and show up, pissed and all, in the middle of the test run of the time machine. Marty McFly narrowly escapes in the DeLorean, triggers the time machine and ends up in 1955. Can Marty find some plutonium to get back and avoid messing up his own future?

“Back to the Future” does everything right. The premise of the movie is interesting with plenty of opportunity for interesting adventures. How would it be to meet your parents when they were your age? What if you triggered the butterfly effect, changed a small thing in the past with massive result is the future? How would you cope with life in the past or how would the past cope if you presented it with something from the future?

The tone is comedy, but not silly or stupid comedy. We believe in the characters and the situations all the way, something too often forgotten in modern comedies, and both the situations and the characters are highly amusing, if not hilariously funny. One of the famous behind-the-scenes stories tell that filming was quite far with another actor as Marty McFly, until they realized that he simply was not hitting that tone of comedy. Instead, they drew in Michael J. Fox, re-shot those scenes and nailed it. Lots of scenes take place in the night because Fox was engaged in another production during the day.

This was a brilliant move. Fox and Lloyd have incredible chemistry, or maybe I have just watched this so many times that I feel they belong together. Then again, I can say that of the entire cast. Crispin Glover makes for an amazing George McFly, Leo Thomson works convincingly as Lorraine Baines/McFly and best of all Thomas F. Wilson is the most glorious villain, Biff. Wilson is the nicest guy imaginable, but as Biff he is mean, brutal and incredibly low... and hilariously funny.

The score is perfect. Alan Silvestri’s themes are now pop culture classics, instantly recognized the world over, Huey Lewis’ “The Power of Love” became a hit (Did you know it is himself dismissing his music as “just too loud” in the rehearsal scene?) and several classic fifties hits play significant parts in the story (How was it Chuck Barry came up with the sound for “Johnny B. Goode”?).

Finally, the movie is simply exciting. It is paced well, tense in its moments, adventurous (did I already mention that?) and not afraid of giving us a visual spectacle, yet keeping the special effects in rein.

Great Scott! Wouldn’t I like to have a such a DeLorean?

Then I would say: “Where we are going, we don’t need roads”