Category Archives: 2011

Movie: The Iron Lady (2011)

Posted on by
Reply

In a few words, this movie is not worth watching except for the commendable performance by Meryl Streep as Thatcher.

Jim Broadbent who played Thatcher’s husband Dennis Thatcher said something like the following:

“When I heard that an American actress was to play Thatcher, I thought, ‘Huh, is that okay?’ I didn’t have high expectations. However, when I shared supper with Meryl after we started filming and when she casually mixed a British accent into conversations, I felt that perhaps she can play Thatcher after all.”

I don’t think he said that with mean intentions. Broadbent has co-starred with many great British actresses and has received high honors as a great actor such as an Oscar and Golden Globe Awards; Broadbent did not blindly believe the praise by Hollywood of Meryl being “the best actress in the world” and seemed to have been observing her with an attitude of, “Let’s see what you can do.”

Of course Meryl is not stupid. She talks about the resolution to play Thatcher as follows:

“Yes, it was a frightening experience as an actor to perform as Thatcher. But looking at myself as one American actress thrown in among British actors, I found some commonality with Thatcher, a woman fighting alone in the political world in those days, and I gained the courage to play her.”

Scenes of Meryl looking very much like Thatcher and giving speeches are scattered throughout the movie trailer. Since Thatcher has been both criticized and praised, I was eager to see how the producer would interpret Thatcher’s great achievements in fighting the downfall of the United Kingdom and show her essence. To my dismay, unlike the trailer implies, the movie shows very little of Thatcher as a politician and the major part of the movie depicts Thatcher suffering from dementia after her retirement.

This movie should be called “The Teacup-Washing Lady” instead of “The Iron Lady”. In her younger days, Thatcher had quipped, “I will never be one of those women…I cannot die washing up a teacup!” In the final scene, Thatcher in her old age is alone in her kitchen, silently washing a teacup. Once the most known female face in the United Kingdom, no one recognizes her when she goes shopping. In essence, this movie seems to want to mean-spiritedly say, “Look at her doing what she once said she would never do. Hahaha!” and, “Washing teacups alone every day… A fitting end for not prioritizing family and neglecting the family you had.” Why must career woman Thatcher who served the United Kingdom be judged in this way? I wonder why the left-wing party, which supports the independence of women, doesn’t complain. According to Thatcher supporters, this movie is a left-wing conspiracy to undermine Thatcher’s legacy. I see.

Clever Meryl Streep said something like the following:

“I think it’s wonderful to grow old. The reason is I suddenly discover new nuances to things I didn’t understand or had overlooked until now. For example, the act of washing a teacup can be a precious moment of life, which only the aged person can understand.”

Meryl certainly plays roles in better and better movies as she ages. There is the criticism that only young and beautiful and glamorous actresses are given roles in Hollywood, but Meryl seems to be like a publicity billboard for Hollywood that says that Hollywood isn’t so narrow-minded. Because better roles go to her one after another, actresses of the same generation, such as Diane Keaton, Sally Field, and Glenn Close—especially Glenn Close who has a similar range of acting and ambiance—have their roles snatched away and it’s a pity. However, since Meryl built her secure position in Hollywood through self-restraint, politeness towards colleagues, and extraordinary efforts, I can let it slide.

日本語→

Movie: Moneyball (2011)

Posted on by
Reply

Moneyball is the movie adaptation of the nonfiction book Moneyball: The Art of Winning an Unfair Game by Michael Lewis. When the movie company voiced interest about buying film rights for the book, Michael Lewis’s frank reaction was that he didn’t care, but he wondered if a movie based on a book with such statistics would be interesting. However, after watching the movie, he found that his book actually appealed to a wide audience and he was impressed that the movie accurately presented what he wanted to say.

Brad Pitt was nominated for the Academy Award for Best Actor for this movie, but the question of “why?” rose up from fans who had expected that Leonardo DiCaprio would seize the prize for this nomination. Leonardo shows his great acting ability in a dramatic performance as J. Edgar Hoover, the Director of the FBI for over 40 years, while Brad Pitt in Moneyball just shows his natural charm and trademark smile. Fans felt things like, “Is Brad even acting?” or “Isn’t this a little unfair?” or “Poor Leo!” However, this movie was interesting certainly largely due to Brad Pitt and this movie allows us to think about modern America in a variety of ways. I think this movie is much more relevant to our modern lives than J. Edgar.

The stage is set in 2001 on the Oakland Athletics, a poor team stationed in Oakland, California. Star athletes Johnny Damon, Jason Giambi, and Jason Isringhausen, as free agents that can decide what team to play for, slip away from the A’s and transfer to teams that offered a larger salary. General manager Billy Beane is desperately searching for a method to win on a limited budget.

One day, during a visit to the Cleveland Indians office for trade negotiations, Beane happens to meet Peter Brand, a Yale graduate. Brand used sabermetrics that objectively evaluated players using various statistics, which is different than how other scouts evaluated players. Beane, despite opposition, immediately recruited Peter Brand for his own team and devises a strategy for victory under a low budget using radical sabermetrics.

Briefly, Beane’s strategy was to not offer huge salaries to players deemed as “star material” based on the subjective criteria generally used in those days; instead, he would use statistics including on-base percentage, slugging percentage, and batting eye, as well as look for players with smart decision-making, to determine the probability of making runs. This would be a big component in determining which players to recruit; many of these players had been ignored by the subjective evaluation and would therefore be cheap to recruit. He was not recruiting young players based on their “future prospects” based on subjective criteria and even gave players who were past the height of their professional careers a chance if there was something they could contribute. By doing so, Beane advanced the Oakland Athletics to the playoffs almost every year and the team set the record for the longest winning streak across all baseball teams in 2002, despite their total annual salary being only one third the amount of the top team, the New York Yankees. In the movie, the Athletics are shown as suddenly becoming a powerful team in 2002, but, in reality, the A’s had consistently been winning in the playoffs, although they had never won the World League. Other teams wondered where the strength of the A’s came from. Because Beane’s strategy relied on statistics, the pattern of the Athletics doing well in their season with many games and often winning their playoffs, but not necessarily winning in the short series of the World League Championships, suggests that his strategy was working.

I believe this movie is not a simple baseball movie because it depicts various important issues in modern America, but what I wish to emphasize are the following three points.

First, this movie, for better or for worse, depicts the characteristics of management of American companies very well. The structure of the baseball industry is the owner, the general manager, and then the manager. The owner offers money to recruit players, the general manager makes the team plan, while the manager runs the actual games. While the manager focuses on making a technical plan for each game, the general manager plans with a more long-term outlook and must have many skills. The general manager maintains a positive public image by making appearances on various interviews as the face of the baseball team, must command the baseball team with charisma, have a sense of management since he has bargaining power with regards to contract renewals and trades, as well as have insight to see the ability of players. The general manager is equivalent to the CEO of a corporation. As it is in top-down management, Beane had considerable power and mercilessly dismissed or traded people under him. However, on the other hand, Beane established an objective standard from statistics and asked players to meet these expectations. Therefore, when a player with a high salary was dismissed, the reason could clearly be explained and the players that were unfortunate enough to not meet the usual subjective standards of “popularity” were motivated when given an opportunity by Beane. The dictatorial power held by a CEO is very American and their power determines the quality of the company management.

Second, this movie criticizes the unfair distribution of wealth spreading across America. It is so in professional baseball, but also, in the world of movies, the price paid for different actors is extremely uneven. From the late 1980s, popular actors and actresses like Tom Cruise and Julia Roberts began to demand enormous performance fees, and other actors began to follow their example. Today, for example, Kristen Stewart, barely 21, is said to demand a performance fee of $20 million for one movie. This is probably equal to the total sum of the salaries of 50 to 100 actors, equally qualified. In other words, Hollywood would rather give a transiently popular young actress one job and take away the jobs from 100 other capable actors or actresses. Recently, Hollywood is reconsidering this inequality and it is said that statistics are used to calculate the ratio of box office performance to actor performance fees in order to evaluate actors. Matt Damon and Naomi Watts are examples of statistically good actors who don’t charge much but perform well. Even Brad Pitt declared that the time of top actors being overpaid with exorbitant amounts of money is ending. I think he worries that the movie industry will decline unless this trend of actors demanding unreasonable amounts of money whenever they become popular is suppressed.

Finally, there is the issue of personal happiness. Beane, formerly the top player in his high school, was chosen as the future star in the first round of drafts by the New York Mets. Believing the words of the scout and attracted to the high salary offered, Beane declined the student scholarship offered by the prestigious Stanford University and chose the professional route; after not much success as a player, Beane switched to being a scout and began his second career in baseball. After his success with the Athletics, the Boston Red Sox offered him $12.5 million, the highest offer for a general manager in history; however, Beane declined the offer because he decided to not make a life choice based on money. He did not want to be separated from his daughter who lived in California, and he loved the Oakland Athletics. Oakland is between San Francisco, the most refined city in America, and Berkeley, an academic center. This city has a unique culture and is extremely politically liberal for America, but a large portion of the residents are poor black people. The event of a black teenager being shot and killed by the police sometimes happens. The Oakland A’s give something for local residents to be proud of, provide casual entertainment, and lift the spirits of young people. Beane did not forsake the team for money. There are other managers who have adopted Beane’s strategy of sabermetrics. Now that he was familiar with the A’s, there was no reason to start over again.

Within the movie, there’s a scene where Beane’s daughter worries about her father being fired, but we don’t have to worry. After Beane’s continued success, his contract was extended until 2019. Billy Beane was chosen by Sports Illustrated magazine as the Top Sports Manager of the 2000s and he is recognized as the top manager throughout the baseball world today.

日本語→

Movie: Bir Zamanlar Anadolu’da – Once Upon a Time in Anatolia (2011)

Posted on by
Reply

This is the newest film of world-renowned Turkish director Nuri Bilge Ceylan. This movie’s plot briefly: there is a murder in Turkey’s capital Ankara; the dead body is left somewhere in Anatolia overnight; and the next day a policeman, a prosecutor, an autopsy surgeon, the murder suspects, and an excavation crew set out to search for the body for evidence.

In this film, Nuri Bilge Ceylan’s characteristic non-dramatic plot and beautiful cinematography is pronounced and it does not betray the expectations of fans who love this about his works. However, compared to his previous works, there are more characters in this movie and lots of dialogue in order to describe each person’s character. Although it is not dramatic, the story is stronger compared to previous works and there is an element of mystery solving. While a little bit long, it keeps you captivated and guessing until the end. The movie proceeds at a relaxed tempo so that viewers can understand each person’s character, so I’m actually glad that the movie is as long as it is since each character is quite complicated. Also, very interesting metaphors are effectively inserted at critical points. There is also a long shot where an apple that fell from a tree rolls down a hill and all the way down the stream without the scene being cut. I really wonder how these kinds of scenes are done.

If I were to describe this movie’s distinction briefly I might say that, as rain comes down bit by bit into a pool of water, each raindrop gently creates a few ripples and it resonates with or cancels out another’s ripples forever; each ripple is a different character. After watching the movie, a small stone is gently thrown into the audience’s heart and it ripples forever.

The plot simply put is “went, searched, found,” but there is a multi-layered sentiment contained within this movie. The one that I felt the strongest was the melancholy of “the man who can’t make his woman happy,” and the nihilism.

The young and handsome surgeon is divorced with no children, but the policeman says this is good since it is a crime to raise children in a world with no hope. The policeman’s child has mental problems, which has become a point of tension in his marriage and he is exhausted by his relationship with his wife. The prosecutor talks about an interesting case that he handled as if he doesn’t have any problems in his own life; after an extremely beautiful woman birthed a child, she predicted her death and then she met an unnatural death on that exact day she predicted. However, the surgeon questions whether this death was a suicide. The surgeon calmly says that the human motive for suicide is revenge against someone else. At this point, the viewer can guess that the woman who left behind a 3-month-old baby after her suicide was the prosecutor’s wife. The murder suspect is being arrested for killing his friend; they were having a friendly drink together when the suspect let slip, “Your child is actually my child,” and then the ensuing fight ended with him killing his friend. This child loses his father that raised him to his biological father.

This movie has almost no female characters. The only key female character is the beautiful daughter of the chief of a poor village; the crew looking for the dead body stops and dines at this village. The daughter offers tea with the only light in the scene coming from her candle. Everyone admires her extreme beauty and each recalls the woman they were unable to make happy in their own life, but none of them actually speaks with the daughter. A fly circles around and is attracted to the light from the candle the daughter is carrying. The men say, “Beautiful women have unhappy fates,” and distance themselves from her.

This movie is an extremely clever movie. The audience may actually miss how the murder happened. Also, although depicted as kind and intelligent in the movie, the surgeon makes an unexpected decision at the end. We are left wondering what his intention was and what he feels as he gazes out his window. Was this an act of kindness from a man to a distant woman, and can he show such gentleness to the women in his own life?

Since the riddle and solution are mixed together within the story, this certainly is not a straightforward movie. Whenever I watch movies by this director, I wonder if the sense of emptiness flowing through the bottom of his movies is due to his character or the gloominess of Turkey’s society that has many complicated problems.

Turkey is geographically and culturally between the east and west, between European and Asian culture. Anatolia, also known as Asia Minor, is the gate to Eastern culture while Istanbul is the gate to Greek and Western culture. The area is very religious and many are Muslim. This area is the source of the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers so a unique culture has developed here since ancient times. Considered a minority, many Kurds reside in this area now. When Turkey faced the crisis of possible disintegration as a nation after their defeat in World War I, Anatolia became the center of a nationalist movement. Therefore, Turkey’s capitol Ankara is in central Anatolia. The Anatolia area is still poor, has a severe subarctic climate, and is very religious, as compared to the picturesque and international and growing economy of Istanbul. I think the director may have a special sentiment toward Anatolia, but it is hard for me to know for sure.

Anatolia is known for the magnificence of world heritage sites like Cappadocia, but the director avoids the scenic jagged rocks and instead strictly captures the leisurely grasslands, looking for areas with winding roads. The movie is like this scenery—a grassy plain undulating forever.

日本語→

Movie: A Separation (2011)

Posted on by
Reply

After watching this movie, I was left speechless with a heavy feeling in my stomach. This kind of feeling doesn’t happen often.

This movie begins with the divorce trial of a middleclass Iranian couple. The wife Simin, thinking about the future prospects of her 11-year-old Termeh, wishes to leave the country after finally getting a visa with great difficulty. However, the husband Nader can’t leave his father who has Alzheimer’s behind, so the couple decides to file for a divorce. The couple fights over who gets custody of their daughter and during this time, Simin returns to her parents’ home.

Simin hires her friend’s little sister Razieh, a working-class woman, as a helper, but Razieh ties Nader’s father to his bed and goes out. When Nader discovers his father, he is enraged and forcibly throws Razieh out of his house. Later that night, he finds out that Razieh has a miscarriage. Hodjat—Razieh’s husband who was released from prison, has a short temper, and is violent—accuses Nader of murder and threatens Nader’s family and the female teacher who testifies for Nader in court.

Two stories are developed throughout this movie—one between Simin and Nader fighting over custody in the divorce courtroom, and the other between two couples of different social class and religious intensity. This movie has a splendid story and you can’t even take a short break as the suspense captures you from the beginning until the end. To say it briefly, this story is one that could happen to anybody, but the mystery solving component is very well made. While Turkish director Nuri Bilge Ceylan has perfect cinematography, experienced Iranian movie screenwriter Asghar Farhadi is a perfect storyteller. However, the true splendor of this movie is the profound message hidden in the plot.

Asghar Farhadi’s style, in short, places a certain amount of trust in the audience. A lot of Hollywood movies have an obvious “good guy” and “bad guy” and the plot just ends with a happy ending. The director here doesn’t spoon-feed the viewer exactly what to think in this movie. It is unclear to the viewer whether Nader settles out of court with Hodjat or is sent to prison, or what truly caused the miscarriage. The choice of parental authority comes down to Termeh, but we don’t know what she chooses. Also, we aren’t given the whole explanation of whether Razieh truly tried to steal Nader’s money, why Razieh ties down Nader’s father, who opened Nader’s father’s oxygen tank to a dangerous level, or the region Simin is trying to emigrate to. The director’s design is not to give explanations to these matters, but rather to leave it up to the viewer’s interpretation.

Asghar Farhadi answered in an interview, “A doctor has determined that one of his patients has one month left to live. An Iranian doctor would not tell the patient he is going to die and will tell the truth only to the relatives of the patient. However, a Swedish doctor will tell the patient honestly that they have one month to live to help them prepare mentally. You cannot say which doctor is right. The important thing is that you as a patient can choose which doctor to have.” He wishes for the audience to feel something by telling a story where any possible conclusion is valid. He doesn’t care if viewers reach a different conclusion than one he had envisioned. Each viewer thinks and feels with their own heart.

But what is the message he wishes to convey within the plot? I believe that he wishes to criticize how society confines women in the name of Islamic fundamentalism. Razieh is a very religious woman. When she discovers that Nader’s father is incontinent, she calls a religious authority to see if she is allowed to touch and clean the body of this old man. The movie didn’t tell how the authority answered. Perhaps the authority said no, but Razieh couldn’t leave the man as he was. Razieh’s child who is 4 years old reassures her mother, “It’s okay. I won’t tell daddy.” Razieh claimed that Nader caused the miscarriage even though she does not know 100% whether it was his fault because she fears being beaten to death by her husband. However, in the end, she tells the truth even though it could put her own life in danger because she feared that if she accepted the large amount of money from Nader to settle, God would punish her daughter for her lie. Simin also fears that her own daughter will die in obscurity in Iran so she wishes to get out of Iran, even if that means leaving behind all her assets. This movie depicts the difficult decision a mother with a girl must make. Asghar Farhadi’s daughter plays Termeh, Nader and Simin’s daughter, in this movie. This young girl won Best Actress in the Berlin Film Festival. Asghar Farhadi also wishes for the best for his daughter’s future, but I think he is not 100% sure that is possible within the current system of Iran.

People in the movie industry that criticize the present regime of Iran must take refuge outside of Iran or could end up in prison. Asghar Farhadi had in the past advocated for an artist who, with the Green Movement, opposed Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s reelection in the 2009 presidential election, and Farhadi was temporarily banned from making movies. After that, he was determined to stay within the country and make movies, but has succeeded in making movies while evading government oppression. First of all, he does not explicitly criticize religion and the characters do not physically touch each other. The criticism of the system is implied through the protagonist Simin, who is depicted as a slightly selfish woman of the intellectual rank. “I do not want to raise my child in this environment!” she states boldly in front of the judge, but it is left to the interpretation of the audience whether the environment means with her stubborn husband or within Iran’s society. It is then lamented and murmured over and over again, “If Simin hadn’t the ambition to emigrate, such a case wouldn’t have happened.” However, in this movie, Simin and Razieh are two young mothers who act for their child. Simin is very intelligent and puts others’ happiness before hers, sacrificing herself as many women do. Even while Nader’s father is suffering from dementia, there is a scene where he still remembers Simin’s kindness.

This movie was nominated for and won Best Foreign Film in the 84th Academy Awards, winning over the other nominations including Footnote, a film from Israel. The people of Iran were very excited for their victory over their longtime enemy Israel. This award will make it easier for Asghar Farhadi to make movies within the system of Iran, but I hope he doesn’t become too arrogant from this award. From the splendid speech that he gave when he won his Oscar, though, I do not believe that he is this kind of person.

日本語→