Den amerikanske ven
The
seventies was a fertile period for many young directors and I am enjoying
watching the early movies of directors who would grow into famous and
influential filmmakers. Wim Wenders is another one of those and though “The American
Friend” was by no means his first movie, it was his international breakthrough.
“The
American Friend” is a neo-noir, which is already a plus for me. We never learn
exactly what is going on, just bits and pieces. Lighting is faded, it is always
either sunrise or sunset as if the characters are living in that half-light.
Everyone is doomed in some way or another but retain some level of coolness. In
the case of “The American Friend” there is the additional element of naturalism
that just makes it scarier. This is not a cartoonish world but a very familiar
one.
We follow
the story through two viewpoints rather than one. Tom Ripley, American, (Dennis
Hopper) deals in art forgery from a base in Hamburg and Jonathan Zimmerman,
German, (Bruno Ganz) is an art expert who due to a blood disease now just do
picture framing. They get in contact at an art auction where Jonathan recognizes
Tom as a fraud and refuses to shake his hand. In return, when Tom is contacted
by a gangster, Minot (Gerard Blain) looking for a hitman, he recommends Jonathan
and exaggerates his poor health.
Minot contacts
Jonathan and suggests that he take the contract to secure funds for his wife
and son. Jonathan first refuses, but Minot tempts him with an expensive second
opinion on his condition in Paris. One Minot of course falsifies. So, Jonathan
becomes a hitman and through a very intense pursuit actually succeeds. Minot
wants to follow up with a second hit, but Tom has come to like Jonathan and
intervenes and eventually they have to fight together against a bunch of
gangsters.
I never
understood what the gangster war is about. Who are the people they are killing?
And why? And why are they suddenly after Tom and Jonathan? But neither do
Jonathan. Or Tom for that matter, though at least he understands how dangerous
they are. And it is that uncertainty, that unseen, unexplained presence that
makes them terrifying. Jonathan is in far deeper than he can even understand
and suddenly finds himself living a double life apart from his wife and child.
Who are both as adorable and innocent as it is possible to be.
This
half-life, half-light and inability to control your own life is at the heart of
this movie and it works surprisingly well. It is not quite a suspense movie,
and it is not quite a European art movie but it is somewhere in between and
succeeds at that.
I love the
language element. Characters are using “natural” language, which means an odd
mix of German, English and even a bit of French. Accents are sometimes heavy,
but natural, and it helps me believe in the story. The Book mentions an
American-European conflict, but I do not see that at all. There are no
misunderstandings here, just the haziness of reality using people from
different places to give it an international and even more mysterious flair.
Noir, or
neo-noir for that matter, never have happy endings and it is no spoiler to say
that this movie is true to form, but there is a sense of closure that provides
some satisfaction and that is another plus in my book. It is an ending I will
probably contemplate for a while.
In fact,
the more I think about it, the more plusses this movie accumulates, so I guess
this ends up with a recommendation from me. And hopefully a lot more from Wim
Wenders on the List.
Love Wim Wenders, love Bruno Ganz and loved this movie. I had forgotten how epic the ending is when I saw it last. -- Bea
ReplyDeleteYes, the ending is special and one I will have to think about for a while.
DeleteI am hoping for a lot more Wenders moving forward.