Writer-director Krzysztof Zanussi’s early Illuminacja is autobiographical. Its protagonist, Franciszek Retman, is a graduate student in physics because he wants to know, he tells the university interviewing board, “things that are certain, unequivocal.” Zanussi himself studied physics at the University of Warsaw. But things changed for him. He proceeded to loftier intellectual ground, studying philosophy at the University of Kraków. Finally, he studied film at the Lódź Film School and became Poland’s greatest filmmaker. His “illumination,” the wisdom he attained as “an enlightenment of the mind” (St. Augustine), required the redirection of the course of his life. We see this reflected in Retman’s experience. I do not know, however, whether Zanussi suffers (or suffered) any such serious heart disease as afflicts Retman. Indeed, the disease may be metaphorical, an index of awareness of vulnerability that comes from knowing that important, human things are not “certain, unequivocal.”
The two principal events that transform Retman are a turbulent romantic relationship and the death of a friend during their mountain-climb. But something else floats in and about: the responsibility of scientists that they are loath to embrace. Zanussi has stated: “The scientist is more interesting than anyone else as he is more responsible for the world than the usual people one finds in movies.” Yet early on Retman remarks, “I don’t feel responsible for the A-bomb,” on the ridiculous grounds that he hadn’t participated in its invention. Another student, though, wins their argument by exposing Retman’s evasiveness, self-absorption, self-delusion: “But [the inventors] were physicists, too.” Retman’s journey, then, is in the direction of responsibility. Those who climb mountains, as Zanussi’s masterpiece, Constans (1980), reminds us, must return to earth, one way or the other.
Most decisive for the brilliance of Zanussi’s Illumination is the form he has given it. It’s a mosaic, a kaleidoscope of pieces in which one set of snippets of film sometimes is interrupted by another set of snippets. This “piecing together” opposes viewer complacency so that even those of us who are intellectually inferior to Zanussi—and that includes all but one person I’ve known or met*—are compelled to approach his film in an intelligent, mentally active way. One cannot “go with the flow” when there is no flow.
Zanussi was at the christological age when he made this terrific movie—when a boy (according to Christian myth) becomes a man. Illumination is full of wit. At one point Retman interrupts his contemplation of cosmos to have his palm read. His motive is devious: he is curious to see how inaccurate the palm reader will prove herself! She tells him that he doesn’t like himself. She is saying this to a most self-satisfied creature. But, of course, Zanussi’s prick of wit eventually turns around and aims itself at the boy, whose self-satisfaction has been an evasion, a delusion.
Hacks do not spare others. Artists do not spare themselves.
* René Girard
B(U)Y THE BOOK
MY BOOK, A Short Chronology of World Cinema, IS CURRENTLY AVAILABLE FROM THE SANDS FILMS CINEMA CLUB IN LONDON. USING EITHER OF THE LINKS BELOW, ACCESS THE ADVERTISEMENT FOR THIS BOOK, FROM WHICH YOU CAN ORDER ONE OR MORE COPIES OF IT. THANKS.
AN AMERICAN IN PARIS (Vincente Minnelli, 1951)
February 10, 2008Obnoxious Gene Kelly, who plays the “young” American painter in “too real and too beautiful” Paris, is always something of a chore to endure, and his Oscar-winning choreography is spotty; but I like An American in Paris, Vincente Minnelli’s first Oscar-winning best picture. Its splendid romance and sprightly, artificial Paris glow. And the Gershwin music: ’S wonderful.
Despite Alan Jay Lerner’s winning the Oscar for best story and screenplay, many routinely disparage the film for its story, which some find minimal, others find too conventional, and still others find both minimal and too conventional. “’S Wonderful” is sung as a duet between Kelly’s Jerry Mulligan and Georges Guétary’s Henri Baurel—two men who do not know that the two different girls they’re singing about as loving them are in fact the same girl, Leslie Caron’s Lise Bouvier. I submit that any script that brings us to such a moment is brilliant. But, admittedly, Minnelli and Oscar Levant, whose Adam sits between them at a café and does know that his two pals are in love with the same girl, trump Lerner with comic genius as Adam/Levant nervously mixes up his cigarette-smoking and coffee-drinking.
I do not like everything about An American in Paris. The fact that their sex is kept off-screen doesn’t cleanse of tawdriness Jerry’s relationship with a rich patron, who is callously dropped from the film to make way for the sweeping Jerry-Lise romantic come-together.
Guétary’s singing of “(I’ll Build a) Stairway to Paradise” is one high point, and Kelly and Caron’s charming dance in the park and vivid dream-ballet are two other high points. Yet another borrows from Buster Keaton’s “The Play House” (1921), showcasing concert pianist Adam/Levant in multiple roles in his dream: performer, conductor, other orchestra members, audience.
B(U)Y THE BOOK
MY BOOK, A Short Chronology of World Cinema, IS CURRENTLY AVAILABLE FROM THE SANDS FILMS CINEMA CLUB IN LONDON. USING EITHER OF THE LINKS BELOW, ACCESS THE ADVERTISEMENT FOR THIS BOOK, FROM WHICH YOU CAN ORDER ONE OR MORE COPIES OF IT. THANKS.
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=Dennis+Grunes&x=14&y=16
http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=Dennis+Grunes&x=14&y=19
Tags:Gene Kelly
Posted in Formal Capsule Film Comments | Leave a Comment »