MARKETA LAZAROVA

 

Back in 1998, in a poll conducted between 55 Slovak and Czech film critics and publicists, František Vláčil's 1967 medieval epic “Marketa Lazarová” was awarded the prestigious title of being voted the greatest Czechoslovakian film of all time. It is also a film that has been at the heart of much frustration for myself, as during my first viewing of “Marketa Lazarová”, I found it so dense and narratively complex, that I could not make heads or tails of the film, despite being impressed by the supreme film making craft on display. Not being able to connect to such a prestigious and much loved film really bothered me, particularly due to the fact that everything else I had seen from Vláčil, I absolutely loved (especially his debut film, “The White Dove”, from 1960), and I was determined to have a more positive experience of “Marketa Lazarová”, whenever my next viewing of the film turned out to be. Almost a decade later, and the Melbourne Cinematheque are currently doing a three week retrospective of František Vláčil's cinema, screening five of his features, with “Marketa Lazarová” being the first film shown. I was very excited to finally see the film on the big screen, but wanted to go in with as much context as possible in regards to the film, so I wouldn't be left with the feeling of similar disappointment like after my first viewing. As such, I went through all of the special features on my Criterion blu ray of “Marketa Lazarová”, as a type of research which I felt I needed before seeing the film again. Did any of this help or was I left confounded and confused by the film once again?

I was originally going to try and write my own plot synopsis, but I found that the one on imdb sums up the film quite nicely, which is as follows: “Mikolás and his brother Adam rob travellers for their tyrannical father Kozlík. During one of their "jobs" they end up with a young German hostage whose father escapes to return news of the kidnapping and robbery to the King. Kozlik prepares for the wrath of the King, and sends Mikolás to pressure his neighbour Lazar to join him in war. Persuasion fails, and in vengeance Mikolás abducts Lazar's daughter Marketa, just as she was about to join a convent. The King, meantime, dispatches an army and the religious Lazar will be called upon to join hands against Kozlik. Stripped-down, surreal, and relentlessly grimy account of the shift from Paganism to Christianity.”

I am very happy to report that my second experience with “Marketa Lazarová” was a much more positive one, and that I ended up loving the film this time around. What surprised me the most though was just how simple the actual story is once you have a hold on the way František Vláčil goes about telling his tale. I will not sit here though and say that I understood everything and that it was a breeze to sit through, because that would not be true; this is a film where you really need to focus and participate as an audience member because Vláčil isn't going to explicitly explain every detail of his story, which means you need to fill in some of the gaps yourself. If you are not paying attention, you will get lost, and this is a film that is close to three hours long, so it demands a lot of it's audience, but it is well worth the effort. I will admit that it is an exhausting watch, and that my attention did briefly start to wane about two thirds through as I started to get tired, but overall I thoroughly enjoyed “Marketa Lazarová” this time around. I truly believe my research before the film helped in unlocking the film for me, but the thing that helped the most was focusing heavily on the text that is written during the beginning of each “chapter” of the film, as these words actually do a great job of describing what we are about to witness in the following scenes. By processing and understanding what is coming, it then gives you a chance to sit back and watch and marvel at Vláčil's visual artistry that is on display constantly throughout the film.

“Marketa Lazarová” is famous for being a film that feels so real and lived in, as František Vláčil constructs the medieval world of the 13^th century in the utmost detail, with period costumes, locations and weapons, all made from scratch and constructed in the way that they would have been made back then. Everything made feels like it has a purpose, particularly the costumes, which have been designed to protect, warm and clothe the wearer, although comfort doesn't always seem to be the first priority. To help in creating an honesty and realism in their characters, Vláčil got his actors to essentially “live-in” their characters for the duration of the shoot, wearing their costumes as much as they could. This was also done so the costumes would deteriorate over time, like they would in reality, as if the clothing got damaged during shooting, it was not fixed but left to become more tattered as the film goes along. In a way, the film almost has a documentary feel to it, in that it doesn't feel like actors pretending to live in the past, making a movie, instead it feels like the past of many centuries ago has been miraculously captured on film. It depicts a brutal and harsh world where violence often begets more violence, and those that suffer the consequences the most, are often those who are the most innocent, like poor Marketa herself.

One needs to understand just how special “Marketa Lazarová” actually is, in terms of the amount of money and time that were spent in making the film. Throughout the entirety of Vlacil's career, he would never again make another film with the enormity of scope that “Marketa Lazarová” has. It appears that he had a blank check in regards to the budget of the film, and the 548 shooting days he had to shoot his film is almost mind boggling to think of. That said, you get the feeling that Vlacil knew that this would be a one-off and he does not waste the opportunity at all. The visual style of “Marketa Lazarová” is simply to die for, and even if you can not find a way into the narrative of the film itself, I guarantee that you will still marvel at it's images. Vlacil and his cinematographer Bedrich Batka have shot the film in high contrast black and white widescreen, alternating between objective and subjective perspectives (sometimes in the same shot), while also highlighting the abrasive textures of this medieval world. Mud, blood, sticks, snow, ice, fur, grass; this is a harsh landscape, but through Batka's lens and Vlacil's design, it is also achingly beautiful. Vlacil never studied film making, rather he was a student of the fine arts, and his expertise in this field shines through in spades in this film. His images are so intricately composed and choreographed, at times coming across like paintings, but they also strangely feel very real and immediate. Apparently Vlacil story boarded the entire film in intricate detail, and wouldn't move on from a scene until what he filmed matched those storyboards as close as possible. Seriously, “Marketa Lazarová” is one of the most beautiful films I have ever seen, (particularly the scenes set in winter and in the snow), which considering the brutality that is on display within the film, says a lot.

The aural landscape of the film is the other aspect that makes “Marketa Lazarová” so special, as the sounds we hear over certain images do not necessarily marry with what we see, rather they are used to create a feeling or mood to enhance these images, or to jog the audiences memory of elements or moments that have happened in the film prior. Sounds are also often used to help describe the psychological well-being of a certain character at any given time. I would also be remiss not to mention Zdenek Liska's wonderful score that uses medieval instruments of the time to create a musical landscape that is both haunting and beautiful in equal measure. This is one time I really wish I knew more about music than I do, because Liska's score is so powerful and unique, and adds so much to the film, but my limited knowledge on the subject can not do it justice.

Overall, there is so much more that could be said and written about “Marketa Lazarová”, but I honestly do not think I am a good enough writer to even scratch the surface about what makes this film so good. I am just happy that my second experience with the film turned out to be a positive one, and I can now claim to be a fan of “Marketa Lazarová”. Again, after the disappointment of my first viewing where I was unable to understand anything in the film, what surprised me the most this time around was just how simple the story being told actually is. It is a story of small mistakes and missed opportunities, that ends up having huge consequences to the people involved, as well as on those who are indirectly involved like Marketa herself. It is a harsh world they live in, where violence begets violence, but even throughout all this misery, characters find a way to love, although love can only last so long in a world as dark and brutal as this. “Marketa Lazarová” is a challenging film, but an amazing one. Superbly acted, stunningly designed, shot and directed; it is a once-in-a-lifetime movie, that I am rapt to finally be able to say that I understood and thus loved it.

4 Stars.

 

THE THINGS YOU KILL - MIFF 2025

 

As per the MIFF guide: “Reserved academic Ali is feeling emasculated on several fronts; the course he teaches might be cancelled; he and his wife just can't seem to conceive; and his father, Hamit, sees him as a failure. On top of this, he learns that his mother has died, and he suspects Hamit may be responsible. So when an opportunity to exact revenge presents itself by way of a strangely audacious drifter, how can Ali refuse?”

Alireza Khatami's “The Things You Kill” was a film that I hadn't originally planned on seeing at MIFF, but when I did my final sweep of the guide, it's synopsis intrigued me enough to load up the trailer for the film. I was immediately impressed by what I saw and shut the trailer off before it could reveal any of the film's surprises. “The Things You Kill” is a shape-shifting revenge thriller that starts as one thing at the beginning of the film, before becoming something entirely different by it's end. Unfortunately, this is one of those films where I will only be able to allude to certain aspects of the film, because knowing them ahead of time will ruin the secrets hidden within.

The film, which takes place in Turkey, starts with Ali visiting his elderly and disabled mother. Due to his job teaching at the local college, and living some distance away, he doesn't get to visit his mother as much as he should, or as he would like. While there, he cares for her sensitively, cleaning up for her, washing her, re-dressing her, feeding her....all the things a good son should do. However he is disgusted by the state of the house, and once again, that his father is not home looking after his mother. When Hamit arrives home before Ali leaves, the two violently clash, and it is clear that they do not get along. The mother asks her son to leave so that her husband calms down, which he does, reluctantly. Soon after, while back at home, he gets word from his sister that his mother has died. Heartbroken he goes to his mother's place to mourn with the rest of the family, and he and his father have yet another argument. Some time later, during a conversation with one of his sisters, Ali learns that Hamit has been abusive towards his mother before (when he was studying in the US), which makes him wonder if his father actually killed his mother, instead of her collapsing like he told the family. When the death certificate seems to confirm his suspicions, he is outraged and incensed and decides it is up to him to get revenge for his mother, by killing his own father.

“The Things You Kill” is a very interesting movie, and one that took me a long time to register exactly what was going on in the film. Once I did, I realised that it was so much better than I originally gave it credit for. Whilst the film takes place in, and was shot in Turkey, it is actually a Canadian film. Initially when the film begins, it feels like is going to be a character study about a man under so much pressure that keeps increasing, until it reaches a breaking point for him. From the pressures of trying (and failing) to conceive, to learning he may not have a job next semester, to the death of his mother, to then his wife moving out.....Ali takes hit after hit, that you wonder how much a man can take before he eventually breaks. However, a wrinkle to the story is added when he suspects his father of murdering his mother, as he now has somewhere to aim his pent up rage that is building inside him. From here, the movie becomes about revenge, and whether or not it is worth it, and if you do decide to go through with it, how much does that change a man.

And change is something Ali certainly does, as the kind, caring man we saw looking after his mother at the beginning of the film turns into a rude, aggressive man, willing to cheat on his wife with a student, just for a bit of fun. He essentially becomes a different person entirely....but does it make his life any better? Things finally come to a head, when the new gardener Ali has hired convinces him that he should kill his father. This is the catalyst that sees “The Things You Kill” morph into something else entirely as themes of identity, corruption, compliance and guilt are explored in the twisting and turning finale to the film, that has been described by some as very Lynchian.

This is a stunningly well-made film by Iranian director Alireza Khatami, that is so much more complex and brilliant than I originally gave it credit for. For most of the first half of the film, it plays more like an Iranian drama, the sort that Asghar Farhadi made famous. It is built around character, while plot elements that will become important much later in the film are sprinkled throughout the narrative in a fashion that you never notice. Probably the most impressive element in “The Things You Kill” is Bartosz Swiniarski's stunning cinematography, which takes full advantage of the Turkish countryside and mountain areas. Swiniarski, later in the film, also plays with the focus of certain images, so that the scenes play out-of-focus, signalling a further twist in the film during the very surreal second half. Having any image not in focus is a brave thing for a cinematographer and director to do, but because it makes sense here thematically speaking, it pays off brilliantly. The film has also been very well acted, particularly by the men of the picture. Ekin Koç is superb as Ali, a good man going through so much all at once. You can feel the constant pressure he is under, as he is trying to do good by everyone but seems to be failing them all. Ercan Kesal, as his father Hamit, comes across as an aggressive and arrogant man, believes he is the boss of the family, and his say is the end of it. Koç and Kesal have great antagonistic chemistry together, and are worthy combatants for the other to go up against. The most mysterious character though is Reza, the new gardener that Ali has hired, who is played by Erkan Koçak Köstendil, coming across as very smart, friendly and willing to do anything Ali needs of him, but why is he so accommodating to someone who is essentially a stranger (even if he is his boss).

As I have mentioned, “The Things You Kill” morphs into something completely different by its end than what it was at it's start and this is true of the film making too, as whilst the early section of the film feels more like an Iranian drama, once the revenge mechanics begin to take hold, Khatami starts to handle his material in a fashion more suited to American directors like Brian de Palma or David Lynch. There was one shot in particular that truly impressed me, and I am not sure if it could have been actually achieved without the help of visual effects, but it starts outside of the small cabin where Ali's garden is situation before it begins to focus on a broken mirror on the wall. As it gets closer to the mirror, we see in it's reflection the image of Reza for the first time, as the camera continues to focus on him as he moves around the property but through the reflection the entire time. I am not sure if I am making it clear what the shot actually looks like, but it is sensational, and Khatami goes back to the wall later in the film to pull off a similar mirror shot towards the end. Another thing that I loved was a dream that Ali's wife describes at the beginning of the film (which at the time just feels like natural conversation between a husband and wife), becomes so pivotal towards the end of “The Things You Kill”.

Overall, I found this review so hard to write, because I did not want to step on any of the twists that exist in “The Things You Kill”. While it is true that the film initially confused me when I was watching it, once I had worked out exactly what was going on, I liked it more and more, and it is one of the films that I keep thinking about and coming back to since my screening, over ten days ago now. The film making craft on display is exceptional, as is the underlying story itself, but I loved the fact that the film was so malleable and changed, going from something so straightforward to something more extreme and surreal. “The Things You Kill” will not be for everyone, but for those who like cinema a little bit different than the norm, I urge you to check it out, as it is something pretty special, and I think I will enjoy it even more after repeat viewings.

3.5 Stars.

 

NOUVELLE VAGUE - MIFF 2025

 

As per the MIFF guide: “It’s the summer of 1959 in Paris, and the eve of a cinematic revolution. Already having gained a reputation for rattling the French film industry’s cage as an iconoclastic film critic, Jean-Luc Godard has joined Cahiers du Cinéma colleagues François Truffaut, Éric Rohmer, Jacques Rivette and Claude Chabrol in exchanging the pen for the camera. His first feature, Breathless – a jazzy handheld thriller about the love affair between an American aspiring journalist and a French petty criminal starring up-and-coming actors Jean Seberg and Jean-Paul Belmondo – is destined to rewrite the cinematic rule book and make him a global household name. But first, he has to actually make it … and shooting on the streets of Paris with zero permits, little money and no prepared script is easier said than done.”

Director Richard Linklater actually had two brand new films play at MIFF this year: “Blue Moon”, a bio-pic about troubled songwriter Lorenz Hart, and “Nouvelle Vague”, Linklater's love letter to the French New Wave and Jean-Luc Godard himself. If you had asked me which of the two films I would end up loving the most, I wouldn't have hesitated in answering “Nouvelle Vague”, due to my love of French cinema, and the fact that I did not know who Lorenz Hart even was before I saw “Blue Moon”, however the opposite turned out to be true, as I was blown away by “Blue Moon” and Ethan Hawke's performance in it as Hart. It is the more serious of the two films as well. That said, “Nouvelle Vague” was also an excellent film, and a whole lot of fun, but in my eyes, less of an artistic achievement compared to “Blue Moon”.

“Nouvelle Vague” is the dramatisation behind the making of one of the most influential films of all time, Jean-Luc Godard's “Breathless”. In Linklater's film, we watch Godard stress about the fact that all of his contemporaries from Cahiers du Cinema have all made films, and he is still yet to, and he begs producer Georges de Beauregard to help him finance his first film. He agrees, on the proviso that Claude Chabrol and Francois Truffaut help with the script since they have already made successful films themselves, and they could use their names to sell the film. Godard agrees, and the rest of the film is about their journey to make the classic film. This is Richard Linklater's first French language film, but it matters little as it appears being unfamiliar with a language isn't something that bothers the director and force him to make a bad film. If I am being a little unfair, I would say that “Nouvelle Vague” is essentially a gimmick film, as Linklater does his best to recreate classic moments from “Breathless” while getting Jean-Luc Godard to sprout some of the quotes he has become most famous for. It may be a gimmick, but he does it so well, and it is such a fun movie.

To capture the same New Wave spirit that existed during the making of “Breathless”, Linklater has cast his film with a whole bunch of newcomers to the big screen. He has cast enormously well too, finding actors who not only embody the real-life person they are playing, but to actually look very close to them as well. Guillaume Marbeck is sensational as Godard, giving the director the air of arrogance that he is known for, as well as an excitement to go out and shoot his first film. It is hard to believe that this is Marbeck's first leading role because he commands the screen, and is so convincing as the famed director. The way he loses himself behind his ideas, the fact that he never doubts that what he wants to do in his film is the right way to do it, even the way he constantly fights with his producer...you just believe that you are watching Godard himself. I was very impressed with Aubry Dullin, who plays lead actor Jean-Paul Belmondo, and how close he actually looked like him. He is also believable in the physicality he shows as a boxer, while showing a looseness when shooting the film, and not getting too concerned whenever Godard would change his mind over something. Zooey Dutch plays Jean Seberg, and she certainly looks the part, but if there was one thing I was critical about, was how it appeared Dutch was really struggling with the French language and may have even learned her lines phonetically. Then again, Seberg herself was American so maybe this is intentional. Two other people whose performances I loved in the film were Bruno Dreyfurst who plays producer Georges de Beauregard, and is often seen at his wits end over the time and way Godard is shooting his film, and Matthieu Penchinat who plays cameraman, Raoul Coutard. There are also so many blink and you miss it cameos of people playing important characters in cinema history like Roberto Rossellini, Jacques Rivette, Eric Rohmer, Francois Truffaut, Claude Chabrol, Jean Cocteau, Suzanne Schiffman and Jean-Pierre Melville to name a few. Unfortunately the guy Linklater got to play Melville was much too thin and old for the role, although got his deep voice spot on, which is why I am sure he got the role.

To recapture the look of “Breathless”, apparently Richard Linklater used the same type of camera and film Godard used and you cannot say it was a bad decision because “Nouvelle Vague” definitely looks just like the 1960 classic. He and cinematographer David Chambille have done a fantastic job of recreating the look of Paris in 1960, and you would be excused to think that what you are watching actually came from that era; it is that convincing. Probably the best thing about “Nouvelle Vague” is that it captures the spirit of that time and how excited everyone was at making a movie that was a little bit different from the norm. Well almost everyone, as it is shown in “Nouvelle Vague” how confused Jean Seberg was in Godard's shooting decisions, confused at getting her script each morning, and convinced that the film would ultimately be a failure. Apparently, all this is true, and Seberg didn't always get along with Godard, which is not sugar coated here. One scene in the film that is an absolute highlight is when Godard is told to meet someone down in the Metro. He heads down there, only to find Robert Bresson himself, who is currently shooting (his future masterpiece) “Pickpocket”. The scene is also very amusing as Bresson has his star constantly steal things from Godard and his producer whilst they are talking. It is a fantastic scene and if the timelines really did crossover, it is crazy to think that two absolute classics of French cinema were shooting at the exact same time.

I mentioned above how I am a big fan of French cinema, which is true, although the French New Wave is not my favourite era (I love the Poetic Realism films of the 1930's best), even though so many classics were made during this time. Of the New Wave directors, my favourites were always Francois Truffaut and Claude Chabrol, and I also like Alain Resnais (particularly “Last Year in Marienbad” which is a flat-out masterpiece), but I just could not get into Jean-Luc Godard. While I like some of his films, he always came across as too arrogant to me, and that his films were a way to show how smarter he was compared to you. I actually loved that “Nouvelle Vague” doesn't shy away from portraying Godard as an arrogant prick at times, and I also got a laugh when the actors would mock him for it. (I should point out that “Breathless” is one of the Godard films I love).

Overall, I really had a fun time with Richard Linklater's “Nouvelle Vague”. He has perfectly captured both an era and the spirit of that era that saw so many French film classics being made. The film is incredibly well cast, and even looks as though it was shot back in 1960 itself. Whilst it is an entertaining film, I wouldn't really call it a serious film; more like a hang-out film as we spend time with these well known faces as they shoot a film destined to change the world.

3.5 Stars.