Month: September 2010

Mad Men Season Four, Episode 10: “Hands and Knees”

By Jennifer Baldwin. Mad Men is not what one would call a “plot heavy” show. It’s more like a series of character studies — an exercise in atmosphere and style — and less a wham-bang, action-packed thrill ride. But every few episodes a season, Mad Men lets loose and the stuff really hits the fan. Secrets are revealed! Violence breaks out! Babies are born! Geopolitical events cause everyone to freak out!

Episode 10, “Hand and Knees,” is one of those “plot heavy” episodes. And yet, while everything seemed to go down in this one, nothing really came of it in the end (or at least, nothing yet…).

Lane got whacked with a cane by his stern father, so he’s going back to England. But the ramifications of this are still unclear. Joan, presumably, had Roger’s baby aborted (though there was debate at my viewing party over whether she went through with the procedure or not). But on the surface, Joan seems to have gone back to status quo.

Roger and Lee.

In probably the biggest plot development of the episode, Lee Garner Jr. told Roger that Lucky Strike is moving to a new agency, but again the effects of this shake-up are yet to be felt, since Roger hides the news from the other SCDP partners.

Even Don’s storyline, in the end, amounted to nothing (for now).

Everyone was on their hands and knees — some literally, like Don vomiting in his bathroom or Lane after the cane-thwacking, while others only figuratively, like Roger, pleading with Lee to give SCDP one last chance with Lucky Strike — but everywhere, these characters were falling down, weakened, reduced to the level of servants and criminals. And yet, all of these “hands and knees” moments happened in private — in those secret, almost clandestine moments between intimates that no outsider is privileged to see. I think this calls back to the theme in Episode 7 — that issue of intimacy, of and what it means to know another person — only this time we’re seeing the truly dark side of things, those relationships and aspects of the characters that are too horrible to let escape beyond the confines of an apartment living room or a private booth in a restaurant.

Joan and Roger.

Lane’s cruel humiliation at the hands of his father; Don’s complete breakdown at the thought of being arrested by the feds; Roger’s final failure as a business man with Lee Jr.; Joan’s face-saving lie in the abortion doctor’s office — all of these moments of humiliation are kept secret by the characters involved, none of them willing to let others know the depths of their shame and failure. In fact, when Lane reveals the secret of his relationship with Toni to his father, he’s “rewarded” with violence. By the end, in that last scene with the partners, Lane has learned to hold his tongue and keep his private vulnerabilities to himself.

Even Don is still burdened by secrets, still wearing the mask. He tells Faye the truth about his identity — she’s been granted special intimacy — but Don’s not ready to reveal himself to the world. He was on his hands and knees for most of the episode, but he’s not ready to stay there.

The theme of the episode couldn’t have been more obvious thanks to the music selection over the closing credits: an instrumental version of Lennon and McCartney’s “Do You Want to Know a Secret.” Everyone’s got secrets; everyone’s hoping they won’t get found out. But the meaning doesn’t stop there. A closer look at the lyrics reveals a more sinister tone:

Listen. Do you want to know a secret?
I promise not to tell.

There’s a slyness to this lyric, an implication that secrets will be told, it’s only a matter of time. The promise not to tell is empty. Who will be betrayed?

Closer. Let me whisper in your ear.
Say the words you long to hear.

Pete.

This suggests that the words the characters long to hear are not the words they need to hear. Don hears Faye say everything will be alright, he gets reassurances from Pete that everything’s been taken care of at the Department of Defense, but are these just empty words? Can the secret go away this easily?

The episode ends with a whimper and not a bang; most secrets stay hidden. But I have a feeling these secrets won’t last more than a week or two. Nobody knows much for now, but I get the feeling things are about to explode, much like the crowds at Shea Stadium when the Beatles took the stage. After all, there are only three episodes left.

Posted on September 30th, 2010 at 6:10pm.

Tony Curtis, 1925-2010

Tony Curtis.

By Jason Apuzzo. I wanted to say a few words about Tony Curtis, who sadly passed away today at age 85.

Tony Curtis was something of a fixture in my household growing up – he almost seemed like part of the family. Isn’t it funny how movies stars can become like part of your family? Back when classic movies used to run on television much more frequently then they do now (classic movies having been – for better and for worse, relegated completely to Turner Classic Movies), Tony Curtis’ cherubic face and delightfully unsoftened Bronx accent would appear all the time on TV – and my father would stop and point at the screen and say, “Look – there’s Tony Curtis!” And I would look, and smile, and always for the same reason: that it just seemed so improbable that this charming, ethnic kid from the Bronx with the soft face and jarring accent would actually be a movie star. And married to Janet Leigh. And would be someone who played heroes, such as the the Viking Erik in The Vikings. All of it seemed so improbable – the kind of thing that could only happen in America.

He seemed to be living The Dream.

Only years later did I learn that things were much more complicated for him – that Tony Curtis (born Bernard Schwartz) grew up desperately poor, speaking only Hungarian until he was age 6. His father was a Jewish tailor, and the family lived in the back of the shop. His mother was apparently a somewhat abusive figure in Curtis’ life; she was at one point diagnosed with schizophrenia, a mental disease which may have been passed on in some form to Curtis’ brother Robert, who was institutionalized. Things were basically very tough for Tony Curtis in his young life. How tough? He and his younger brother Julius were at one point placed in an orphanage for a month because their parents couldn’t afford to feed them. Four years later, Julius was struck and killed by a truck.

This was his young life.

It seems like the movies were his solace. Apparently he saw Cary Grant in Destination Tokyo and Tyrone Power in Crash Dive, and this led him to enlist in the Navy and serve on a submarine tender. The funny part of it is, years later he would ‘serve’ on board a submarine with Cary Grant in Operation Petticoat, and also pull off a delicious Cary Grant imitation in Some Like It Hot. I guess that was his way of thanking a guy who’d inspired him, who’d helped pull  him out of what had been a troubled and desperate life.

Tony Curtis as Erik in "The Viking."

You were always rooting for Tony Curtis in his movies. The reason, I suspect, is because he never quite seemed as handsome as Kirk Douglas, as commanding as Burt Lancaster, as volcanic and sexual as Marlon Brando, as brilliant and subtle as Laurence Olivier, as ruthless and passionate as Anthony Quinn. Tony Curtis was more like the rest of us, a regular guy from the Bronx who might easily be working (a lá Marty) in a butcher shop – except that this Jewish kid from the Bronx had make it big in Hollywood.

A few thoughts on the The Vikings, my favorite Tony Curtis film. So much of what makes that film compelling is how awkward Curtis seems – like a misfit – in the macho world of the Vikings. Kirk Douglas and Ernest Borgnine seem completely in their element in that film. Tony Curtis? Not so much. The cast of The Vikings is filled to the brim with people who are, alternately, either too beautiful or too sophisticated for Curtis to cope with – the impossibly gorgeous Janet Leigh as Princess Morgana, the cunning and wicked Frank Thring as Aella, or James Donald’s crafty Lord Egbert. [And don’t forget Orson Welles’ basso profundo voice narrating the film.] Curtis basically seems to have nothing going for him in this film except a Bronx accent and a grudge.

Having fun with wife Janet Leigh.

And yet … as the story unfolds, we gradually realize that there’s something we’ve underestimated about Tony Curtis’ character: his tenacity, a tensile inner strength – a passion for justice, perhaps? – that drives him far beyond what he initially appears capable of. Curtis’ ‘Erik’ character carries around with him an inner resource of integrity – nicely symbolized by the royal pommel stone around his neck – that will carry him through thick and thin, and against adversaries far more powerful and cunning than he is. This is the side of Curtis that always comes out in Act 3 of his films – the survivor, the tough Bronx kid who climbed out of a tragic life and made it to the top.

And so the character who begins the movie as a pitiful slave will eventually win both the throne of England – and the lovely Princess whom he prizes above all else. And all of it is credible, because Tony Curtis transforms himself convincingly over the course of the film from desperate schlemiel to bad-ass Viking conqueror, a hardened rival to Kirk Douglas’ fatally sentimental ‘Einar’ character. Does Tony Curtis give a great performance in the film? You bet he does – in fact, it’s iconic. I’ve always suspected, in fact, that the big emotional cues from The Empire Strikes Back were borrowed more or less unaltered from The Vikings, and from Tony Curtis’ performance specifically. If you’ve seen both films, you know exactly what I’m talking about.

Govindini and I had the chance to meet Tony Curtis a few years ago. He was, as you can imagine, courtly and old-school. He had a kind of impish charm that carried over from every movie performance I’d seen him give as a kid. You had the sense standing next to him that he’d lived a great life, and was grateful for the opportunity that America and Hollywood had given him. Even though the industry had to some extent forgotten him, he was neither bitter nor remorseful – the twinkle was still very much in his eye, and he was still living The Dream. Hell, what did he have to complain about? The man had enjoyed six wives – from Janet Leigh to Jill Vandenberg! Not bad for a Hungarian kid from the Bronx.

As we were chatting, he smiled at one point, looked Govindini over, and kissed her hand. Then he winked at me. I laughed. He looked and acted like a sweet young charmer that day, and I’ll bet he still is. I imagine he’s chatting up Janet Leigh somewhere right now.

Posted on September 30th, 2010 at 2:08pm.

Houellebecq

By David Ross. With John Updike, J.G. Ballard, and David Foster Wallace gone to their reward, I have settled on Richard Wilbur, Thomas Pynchon, and Michel Houellebecq as my favorite living authors, though not without reservations. French debauchees with middling literary talent at the sentence level are not my usual cup of tea, but Houellebecq is such a savage hater of modernity, such a mordant, devastating analyst of European ennui. He understands that the collapse of our master narratives leaves us only a few squalid makeshifts in place of the old meaning of life, and he definitively presents, like a head on a plate, the spectacle of rootless, mindless, affectless post-Christian Europe (see here for my previous comments). I appreciate his honesty, his disgust, his discerning sense of cultural calamity.

The Paris Review has published a long interview (see here) that includes several comments worth pondering. It has often occurred to me that Houellebecq is fundamentally conservative. Certainly his critique of European post-modernity (post-humanity?) aligns him with a certain kind of conservative anti-modernism, including my own. Houellebecq gives this account of himself:

Paris Review: They say that you are on the right politically because in The Elementary Particles you seem to be against the liberalism of the sixties. What do you think of that interpretation?

Houellebecq: What I think, fundamentally, is that you can’t do anything about major societal changes. It may be regrettable that the family unit is disappearing. You could argue that it increases human suffering. But regrettable or not, there’s nothing we can do. That’s the difference between me and a reactionary. I don’t have any interest in turning back the clock because I don’t believe it can be done. You can only observe and describe. I’ve always liked Balzac’s very insulting statement that the only purpose of the novel is to show the disasters produced by the changing of values. He’s exaggerating in an amusing way. But that’s what I do: I show the disasters produced by the liberalization of values.

Houellebecq is indeed a chronicler of “the disasters produced by the liberalization of values,” and his books, I would say, belong to the literature of trauma. His rigorous amorality and joyless pornography are likely to appall conservatives, but the impulse to “observe and describe” – and sometimes satirize – must not be confused with acceptance or even celebration of a society reduced to hedonism and social atomism. Disporting with Thai prostitutes is to make the best of a fallen world, or perhaps to rub one’s own face, not unpainfully, in the impossibility of something more or better.

Another important self-insight:

Houellebecq: It may surprise you, but I am convinced that I am part of the great family of the Romantics.

Paris Review: You’re aware that may be surprising?

Houellebecq: Yes, but society has evolved, a Romantic is not the same thing that it used to be. Not long ago, I read de Tocqueville’s Democracy in America. I am certain that if you took, on the one hand, an old-order Romantic and, on the other hand, what de Tocqueville predicts will happen to literature with the development of democracy taking the common man as its subject, having a strong interest in the future, using more realist vocabulary you would get me.

Paris Review: What is your definition of a Romantic?

Houellebecq: It’s someone who believes in unlimited happiness, which is eternal and possible right away. Belief in love. Also belief in the soul, which is strangely persistent in me, even though I never stop saying the opposite.

Houellebecq’s identification with ‘the great family of romantics’ is a sly bit of self-understanding. He belongs to what I call the school of thwarted aspiration, following in a line that includes Wordsworth, Byron (in his primary mode), and Tennyson. In this tradition, the poet yearns desperately for transcendence but lacks the imaginative energy or ingenuity to realize his desire (“I don’t have any interest in turning back the clock because I don’t believe it can be done,” as Houellebecq says). The thwarted poet may ponder the psychology of his own failure (Wordsworth passim); descend into insincerity and evasion (“Hide me from my deep emotion, O though wondrous Mother-Age!” cries Tennyson); adopt some consolatory strategy (Wordsworth’s feeble embrace of the “still, sad music of humanity”); or harbor an implacable, sullen resentment against the limiting order of nature (Byron, George Sand’s Lelia). Houellebecq embodies a combination of these poses. His libertinage affords both escape and consolation, though this consolation, like Wordsworth’s, is always self-conscious and melancholy; his libertinage also functions, much like Byron’s, as a protest, a gesture of disrespect and disobedience – a poke … well, not in the eye.. What makes Houellebecq unique as well as perplexing is the near-complete submersion of his romantic aspiration (“I never stop saying the opposite”), which speaks to the impossibility of enacting or even expressing a romantic program in the postmodern context.

While on literary subjects, I want to say a word about Jonathan Franzen. Several years ago, I tried to read The Corrections. It was so shabby and brainless l that I could manage only ten pages. The Atlantic has come around to my view and takes a vicious clawed swipe at Franzen (see here). Is The Atlantic morphing into a conservative New Yorker? Maybe so. More and more it seems to be filled with politically incorrect raised hackles. I will have to pay more attention. I look forward to a similar article on Dave Eggers, the most foppish and ridiculous of literary impostors.

The Boston Globe, finally, has this fond piece on David Markson’s library and the strange afterlife of authors’ book collections. Markson, who died in June, was a legitimate loss. His novel Wittgenstein’s Mistress (1988) has a gradually waxing reputation as a minor masterpiece. David Foster Wallace listed it among his five direfully underappreciated U.S. novels (see here). It’s been on my reading list for fifteen or twenty years. Markson’s death has prompted me to jump it to the top and I hope to read it soon. I primarily know Markson as a scholar and advocate of Malcolm Lowry, in which capacity he did yeoman’s work.

Posted on September 30th, 2010 at 10:19am.

Star Wars in 3D, Wall Street 2′s ‘Right Wing Appeal,’ Reluctant Communists + Hollywood Round-up, 9/29

By Jason Apuzzo. • The big news today is Lucasfilm’s announcement that the entire, 6-film Star Wars saga is going to be retrofit into 3D, and that the films will be released in series order (i.e., Episode I-VI) starting in 2012. This is fabulous news in my opinion, albeit not surprising. 2012 will mark the 35th anniversary of the original film, and George Lucas has been hinting for years that something like this was in the works.

This announcement will, of course, occasion a lot of uniformed pontificating about some of the bad 3D retrofits that have been released in the wake of Avatar. Two obvious factors mitigate such concerns here: 1) Lucas and his team have about 18 months until the first film is released, giving them a great deal more time than usual to do a high-quality retrofit – as opposed to the rush-jobs we’ve become accustomed to from this past summer; 2) Lucasfilm boasts the best technical staff in the industry, so we can assume the presentation will be state-of-the-art.

The Death Star trench run - soon in 3D.

Just for fun, I’ve put up a Star Wars student fan short (see above) I caught recently that was done in 3D. It was the winner of the “Best Animation” award from the recent Star Wars Fan Film Movie Challenge, sponsored by Lucasfilm. You’ll need your anaglyphic red/blue glasses for this one. [Make sure to get those, by the way, because I’d like to start showing more 3D stuff here at Libertas in the future.] Enjoy!

Incidentally, this means that the forthcoming Star Wars Blu-rays will subsequently need to be re-issued in 3D. They don’t call George a genius for nothing.

• In related 3D news, there’s a rumor circulating that Warner Brothers is pressuring Christopher Nolan to shoot the next Batman film in 3D – and also that Inception may get a 3D retrofit after all. Take that rumor for what it’s worth. Personally I doubt this story, because Nolan is currently The Man over at Warner Brothers, in the wake of Inception and his supervision of the Superman reboot. I would add that the vibe of the Batman series is more old-school retro/noir (largely contrary to the spirit of 3D) – although Nolan did shoot parts of The Dark Knight in IMAX, and he’s obviously fascinated with new technologies. As for Inception, there’s no point in doing a retrofit now anyway because it’s too soon for a re-release and there are too few home systems out there set up for 3D viewing.

• This really cracks me up. Yesterday it was The New York Times; now today it’s The LA Times noticing that Oliver Stone’s Wall Street 2 has ‘right wing appeal.’ Check this out below from film columnist Steven Zeitchik’s piece in the Times today:

For all the Wall Street excess that Stone’s new film depicts, the movie (spoiler alert — skip ahead to the next paragraph if you’d rather not know) in many ways offers a benign, even uplifting message about the Street. Sure, the fevered speculation drives one old-timer to take his life. But the movie ultimately tells the story of a young idealist — and one who gets the money and the girl to boot.

Even one of moviedom’s all-time unrepentant characters, the Wall Street sharpie Gordon Gekko, seeks, and (after a lapse) gains, redemption. Compared to the original, which sees said sharpie sent off to jail, this chapter of his story is  almost.. heartwarming. Big business and the financial industry may have a deep skepticism for the current Democratic administration. But there’s little for them to dislike in a movie about them from the most outspoken of left-wing filmmakers.

This is why you need to read Libertas folks – we’re prescient here. What’s funny is that later in the article Zeitchik darkly intimates that Stone made such a “benign, even uplifting” film for crass commercial purposes – i.e., to sell out and make a buck! Unreal. Not even Oliver Stone can get his films cleared these days by the People’s Truth Commissions over at the NY and LA Times.

The bold designs of the new "Tron."

• Brett Ratner has just taken on Charles Robert Jenkins’ memoir The Reluctant Communist as his next project. This is great news, because this book is apparently one of the most harrowing accounts of life in communist North Korea that’s ever been written. The book deals with Charles Jenkins’ booze-driven defection as a U.S. Army sergeant to North Korea in 1965, a nation he would later refer to as “a giant, demented prison.” Jenkins would remain in North Korea for the next four decades – used by the communist regime as a propaganda prop – until the Japanese eventually arranged for his release. I think it’s very encouraging that Ratner is taking on this complex and interesting project, and we’ll keep an eye on how it develops.

• In other industry news and notes: Arthur Penn – director of Bonnie and Clyde and other classics – has died at age 88. Bonnie and Clyde, of course, really opened things up for the New Hollywood generation. Our condolences to Penn’s family.

• In the wake of Tim Burton’s success with Alice in Wonderland, suddenly now Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, Cinderella and Little Red Riding Hood are hot properties again. Go figure. Also: Mad Men’s Jared Harris has been cast as Moriarty in Sherlock Holmes 2, and Mad Men’s Vincent Kartheiser has been cast in DJ Caruso’s forthcoming sci-fi flick that was being called I’m.mortal until somebody figured out how bad that title looks on a marquee. And finally: the producers of The Infidel (which we loved here at Libertas) will next be doing an adaptation of Alfred Hitchcock’s Strangers on a Train, featuring teens in the lead roles.

Olga Kurylenko.

• On the Sci-Fi Front, there’s an interesting piece over at the LA Times today featuring concept art for Tron: Legacy, plus there’s a fantastic clip of one of the light-bike sequences. Look, I’ve already expressed my concerns about this project – I won’t repeat them here. But there’s no question that this film is going to look fabulous. In other news, the first trailer is out for the new teen alien invasion pic I Am Number 4. The trailer didn’t do anything for me – it just looks like yet another movie featuring teens with ‘special powers.’ Yawn. Here’s the ‘special power’ I wish most teens had today: an ability to read. In other news, the Iron Man 2 DVD is out, and James Cameron is now helping “aboriginal communities with legal action against the Alberta and Canadian governments to stop water-borne pollution from the oilsands.” I’m laughing here because you’ve got to be wondering what Fox is thinking at this point about that Avatar 2 start date …

• Do you recall Jessica Alba’s pseudo-nude shower scene in Machete? Of course you don’t, because you didn’t bother to see that film. Well, we learn today that Alba wasn’t actually nude in the scene when they shot it – she was apparently ‘digitally undressed’ in post! Forget 3D, this is the most promising development in digital technology yet! Imagine the possibilities. By the way, if you click over to this news piece – which 90% of our male readers will – you’ll notice that Alba also lost a little weight once the digital artists were through. So we have the perfect situation here: you ladies don’t need to take your clothes off on set, plus you get to lose a few pounds in the process. And everybody’s happy!

• AND IN TODAY’S MOST IMPORTANT NEWS … some set photos just came out from Terrence Malick’s untitled new romance project starring Ben Affleck and Olga Kurylenko. The photos are a little bland, so I thought I’d feature something more fun with Ms. Kurylenko (see above) – in the mode of a Russian superspy, let’s say. Because we can’t get enough of Russian superspies here at Libertas – particularly when they’re in high heels.

And that’s what’s happening today in the wonderful world of Hollywood.

Posted on September 29th, 2010 at 3:28pm.

Disney Markets Secretariat to Christians; Film Features Fred Thompson + Wink-Wink/Nudge-Nudge Right Wing Messages

By Jason Apuzzo. The Hollywood Reporter has a big article out today about how Disney and director Randall Wallace (We Were Soldiers, screenwriter on Braveheart) are doing a big marketing push to Christians on behalf of the forthcoming family-friendly feature Secretariat, somewhat similar to what was done for Sandra Bullock’s The Blind Side.

The article reveals some interesting details about the film that I’ve excerpted below:

“Secretariat” doesn’t shy away from politics — portraying conservatives and liberals honorably — and embraces Christian themes also are reminiscent of “Blind Side.” …

“Secretariat” even opens with a lengthy quote from the Bible, a portion of God’s speech to Job. A trailer that includes those lines is on Christian websites all over the Internet, and some of those sites contain the earliest reviews of the film and offer users a chance to see advanced screenings. The Bible quote is “transcendent,” Wallace told The Hollywood Reporter. “I wanted to capture that timelessness and majesty. The idea that courage prevails.”

At a screening for a group called Catholic Media Review that included remarks from Wallace, the invitation boasted, “Not only is Randall one of the most successful directors of all time, he is also a devout Christian.” A film reviewer there “highly recommended” the film to readers and noted “a definite subtext of faith which is as rare these days as it is welcome.” That subtext includes a dramatic singing of “Oh Happy Day! When Jesus Walked” at the movie’s climax, and horse groom Eddie Sweat (Nelsan Ellis) speaks reverently of God’s plan and being “lifted up.” …

“Blind Side” was the true story of an essentially homeless teenager adopted by a conservative Christian couple. Although the politics in “Secretariat” are less central to the story, they’re not ignored. Except for the eldest daughter, the [Penny] Chenery family members [owners of Secretariat] were political conservatives during the early 1970s, when the movie takes place. Chenery’s husband (Dylan Walsh) is portrayed as the obvious right-winger who isn’t thrilled with his wife’s decision to pull double duty after she inherits her father’s horse ranch, nor is he happy about his hippie daughter’s embrace of all that “commie crap” she’s getting from anti-Vietnam War protesters. His values are portrayed as old-fashioned, but they’re not belittled.

Politicos on the right side of the aisle no doubt also will appreciate the appearance of former Republican Sen. Fred Thompson in a good-guy role as well as the film’s statement against large inheritance taxes, portrayed as a looming threat that could derail the protagonist’s heroic efforts. One particularly political though short scene has the dad explaining to his children the concept of there being a cost to freedom. Wallace said Chenery, who makes a cameo appearance in the film, was “deeply satisfied” with the way he dealt with politics in the film.

You get the drift. Secretariat will be released October 8th.

Posted on September 29th, 2010 at 9:31am.

LFM Review: Silent Souls

By Joe Bendel. Russia might not be the most hospitable of homes for its ethnic minorities, but the simple forces of time and assimilation are far more responsible for the waning cultural identity and appreciation of the Merja Russians, ethnic cousins of the Finns. However, one Merjan writer’s efforts to preserve his cultural heritage takes him on a fateful road trip with his grieving boss in Aleksei Fedorchenko’s Silent Souls, which just screened at The New York Film Festival.

Though much traditional Merjan culture has faded from everyday memory, Miron knows his friend Aist is fully versed in their people’s traditional funereal rituals. The son of a well regarded Merja poet-laborer, Aist researches and records nearly forgotten Merjan lore as a private passion. More Nordic than Slavic, Aist is not a talkative man, but he will provide Silent’s narration. Indeed the rough hewn character of his (or actor Igor Sergeyev’s) voice makes him one of the most effective narrators heard on film in recent memory, even when subtitled.

From Aleksei Fedorchenko's "Silent Souls."

Miron and Aist will drive across the frozen west central Russian landscape to Lake Nero, the site of his honeymoon with his much younger, yet now tragically dearly departed wife Tanya. There they will build her funeral pyre in much the same manner the Norsemen did millennia ago. For company, they have themselves, their memories, and two caged buntings Aist recently purchased. Those birds are not just for show. Like everything else in Silent they might appear to be a causal impulse buy, but their significance will become apparent later.

Though relatively unheralded among NYFF selections, Silent is one of the strongest films of the festival. Elegiac in multiple ways, it is a powerful meditation on the death of an individual and the protracted demise of a culture, without ever becoming heavy-handed. While it is deliberately paced, it actually gets someplace, both geographically and cinematically.

Throughout Fedorchenko displays a deft touch. Though his symbolism is inescapable, it is always accessible rather than pretentious or obtuse. While in lesser hands, Silent’s ending might have been problematic, Fedorchenko’s methodical groundwork makes it feel logical and fitting, without outright telegraphing it clumsily. Fedorchenko and cinematographer Mikhail Krichman also take full advantage of the evocative landscape, presenting some striking winter vistas.

Whether it is engaging in salty talk with Miron or ruminating on what it means to be Merjan, Sergeyev brings a remarkable naturalness and genuine gravitas to the film as the protagonist-narrator. It is the sort of accomplished work that is often unfairly overlooked due to its lack of affectation.

Though it requires viewers’ full attention, there is great depth beneath Silent’s austerely chilly surface. An excellent film featuring a great lead performance, it is one of the unexpected highlights of the 2010 NYFF.  It screened Tuesday (9/28) at the Walter Reade Theater.

Posted on September 29th, 2010 at 9:08am.