Three quick reviews of three movies I’ve seen lately...
1. The Name of the Rose
 |
| The Name of The Rose right next to some medieval historic fiction on my shelf... |
Adso of Melk is an old man. But in the year of 1327 he was a young man. A novice, at the service of Brother William of Baskerville, a Franciscan monk. His master took him to a Benedictine abbey, somewhere between Italy and France, to a rendezvous with their Franciscan brothers. What they didn’t know, however was the abbot was facing troubles of his own. His abbey had a fresh grave. A young monk was found dead beneath a window that was found closed. The monks suspect devilish influence, and the abbot fears he may have to call the inquisition. But brother Willian, whose “Sherlockian” gifts for investigation have made him famous is convinced the crimes are of an earthly nature. And he is determined to prove it.
This is a fantastic story… The mystery and the investigation is cool enough, and the medieval setting makes it that much cooler. There’s a lot of what’s in the book that’s not in the film, but even then, I could never say one is better than the other. The actors they chose actually look like medieval people, the landscapes are beautiful, and the cacophony of languages in certain scenes makes you forget it’s a movie.
I have seen The Name of the Rose many, many times. It is one of my favorite films. I love William’s excitement with the books in the library, his determination to prove himself right, the way he holds Adso’s hand when the boy’s having a nightmare. It’s a fantastic character. Watching this film is always a great experience.
2) Amadeus.
 |
| Amadeus... |
The day I bought this DVD I thought to myself “if they have Amadeus I am going to get it”. And sure thing, there it was, a single copy of the movie I’d been meaning to see, and I watched it a couple of days latter.
Watching this film was part of the “Mozart phase” I’ve been going through lately. It is the story of Mozart’s life, or perhaps the story of his rivalry with Salieri, told from Salieri’s perspective. It’s not particularly accurate from the historical standpoint, but it’s great storytelling.
Mozart is depicted as a buffoon. He wasn’t like that in real life. But he was terrible with money and he did have an odd sense of humor. His letters often include crude expressions such as “Oh my ass burns like fire!”.The director was surprised. Mozart was one of the greatest genious of Classical Music, and yet his letters are those of an idiotic teenager. It was that surprise he hoped to convey when he wrote Mozart as a gigling buffon, and in my opinion: Mission accomplished! That’s exactly what comes across. The contrast between that part of him that was a genious composer, and the part of him that was a common man.
I wanted to watch this movie because it was mentioned in Tell The Wolves I’m home. The main character in the book used to watch that film with her godfather, because they both liked stories with tragic endings. I agree with her that the movie ruined the story of the requiem, but so what? The film was never meant to be literal, and in spite of its many historical innacuracies it is a great piece.
The first scene of the film is also the best: It sets the tone for the whole story. An old Salieri insists that he was a famous composer once and plays several of his pieces, one after the other, desperatly serching for some flash of recognition in the other man’s face. Until at last he recognizes pone of them! He even sings along, the melody of that Ode to Joy. He apologizes to Salieri and says he had no idea the old man had composed that beloved tune.
But Salieri looks sad. “I didn’t,” he said, “that was Mozart.”
3) The Reader
 |
| The Reader... |
When he was fifteen years old, he met an older woman. She was old enough to be his mother, but she was beautiful and he fell madly in love with her. Every day after school he would pedal to her house. They’d make love and he would read to her. Homer, Tchecov, all the classics. He was a good reader, and she seemed to like the stories. But the love affair lasted only one summer, for one day, he went to her place and the house was empty. She didn’t even say goodbye.
They boy grew up and eventually was sent to law school, to become a lawyer. And because it was the 1950’s and the Germans were still dealing with the messy leftovers of the war, one his teachers took him to watch the trials at Nuremberg. And that’s where he found her again. Sitting in the offendands stand, as a former guard at Awshwitz
This film had me hooked from the start. The story is so rich, so original, and it deals with yet another of the small aspects of the second world war that we seldom see in films and books. But also the boy’s dilemma. He fell in love with that woman when he didn’t know the truth, his first love, and there’s no undoing that, is there? On the other hand, how do you redeem that sort of crime? How do you look past it? And how do you reconcile that? How can the woman you love and the Nazi criminal be one and the same, and what do you tell your heart to feel after that? It’s an impossible story, and one I can’t see myself writing right now, not because I couldn’t think of such a story, but because I wouldn’t know how to finish it.
It’s certainly a great movie, and I want to read the book next.
I wonder what I should watch to next…
