I have just finished watching 9 Kiarostami films. These
represent all his features between 1990 to 2012 (with the exception of “Life
And Nothing More” from 1992 which I did not see). I only partially watched the
feature-documentaries “10 on Ten” (2004) and “Five” (2003).
During this time I deliberately avoided watching most of the
extras provided with the feature films. I did not want to prejudice my viewing
of the films. I know that Kiarostami is generally held in high esteem (wins
prizes at various film festivals etc.) however I am also aware that some people
question his reputation – is there any real substance to his films?
Previously I had only seen The Wind Will Carry Us (1999),
probably back when it was first released in the cinema. I remember at the time
being enchanted with the village portrayed in the film but I was left confused
– was I meant to understand more than I did?
I have followed Iranian films for quite some time now –
going back about 16 years I began to watch all the Iranian films I could see in
art house cinemas and at film festivals. Hollywood, or any commercially-driven
film industry, is an entertainment business – they do not want to address the
important human questions that the world faces. I loved that Iranian cinema shone
a light on these issues.
With an open mind I began by watching Close-Up on 8/2/14. On
the 29/3/14 I finished by watching ABC Africa – I deliberately left this film
to the end as it was an assignment that he was asked to do and so not an
original Kiarostami work - and by partially watching 10 on Ten.
My overall impression is of a very important artist:
·
Photographically
he is innovative – look at Five, the colour palette of Taste of Cherry, Shirin
and the car windscreen reflections (they become pure art in Like Someone In
Love). Look at the remarkable photography of ABC Africa. I understand that
Kiarostami practices photography and has been published.
·
Thematically
he is radical – there is a profound exploration of what cinema is in his work.
He presented questions on the value of reality vs fiction that really challenged
me – that made me question why I feel that reality is in some way more
authentic than fiction. The final scene of Taste of Cherry is an extremely
brave move from Kiarostami. Shirin is a radical film that turns the concept of
cinema entertainment upside-down.
Kiarostami looks at the human experience –
suicide in Taste of Cherry and the flipside which is the desire to
live/Traditional village life in The Wind Will Carry Us that contrasts with
Modern Life/Dissatisfaction with reality and the desire for a fictitious life
in Close-Up as represented by Sabzian but equally by Kiarostami himself who
takes these real life events and transforms them into his own work of fiction
– I asked the question why does Kiarostami do this just as I asked why did
Sabzian do this?
·
Conceptually
Kiarostami is an original – in some scenes in Ten we are denied completely seeing
a protagonist though we hear her interaction with the character.
In Like Someone In Love (2012) I felt that Kiarostami
changed his method and I found the result to be less satisfying than in his
previous works.
Kiarostami has a gentle style of film-making. It never feels
that he is trying to convince us concerning the material in the film – he
trusts that the images and emotions will themselves make an impression on us.
All of the films I watched have left me with the desire to
rewatch them again very soon. I am also very keen to watch his earlier
features/documentaries.
Close-Up (1990) 8/2/14
Criterion BluRay
I am fascinated by what I have seen – I was so puzzled by
what was real vs staged? Who are real life protagonists vs actors?
I am still confused if the courtroom drama was entirely
fictitious or if it was in fact a real procedure that was instigated and
directed by Kiarostami. I read that Sabzian’s responses were scripted by
Kiarostami – did the family know this? The questions this film brought up for
me just go on and on!
I changed sides so many times – it is interesting how my view
of Sabzian was so easily altered by testimony from the family, his own
testimony, the presence of his mother etc. I noticed how impressionable my own
judgements were.
I am tempted to draw the conclusion that the Iranian court
system allows for a very human experience but I am not sure if Kiarostami’s
staging of the procedure reflects in any way the reality of the Iranian system?
The film leaves so much unresolved – does Kiarostami
purposely leave us unclear as to Sabzian’s motives – was he working to commit a
crime or simply escaping from his mundane life into this persona of an
important director? Does Kiarostami have a view on Sabzian’s motivations?
Just as Sabzian seeks to transform his life into a
fictitious story so does Kiarostami seek to transform this real-life event into
a work of fiction.
I am almost certain that one of the policemen who brings
Sabzian into the courtroom at the beginning
of the trial is in fact Mohsen Makhmalbaf.
The use of the flowers, intermittent dialogue recording of
Sabzian and Makhmalbaf on the motorbike and the music all show how carefully
constructed the scene is. Yet somehow I do not feel cheated to learn this –
somehow Kiarostami leaves me with an impression of having watched the flow of
life without judging it too much. I feel that Kiarostami has redeemed Sabzian’s
character by the end of the film regardless of what his motives were.
I greatly appreciated that music was only played at the
conclusion of the film – this method that Kiarostami uses enhances the power
that the music has on us. Less Is More!
This film is extremely complex – emotionally,
intellectually, technically and philosophically. An extraordinary achievement!
I listened to the excellent commentary on the Criterion edition - Jonathan Rosenbaum is very informative, speaks very fluidly and brings great insight to the film. Mehrnaz Saeed-Vafa brings an authentic Iranian voice.
Through The Olive
Trees (1992) 15/2/14 MK2 DVD
I am conscious that I have not seen Life and Nothing More
from 1992 which was made in between Close-Up and this film.
MK2 DVD print is excellent – it only has French subtitles.
I found this to be a very touching film – by the end of the
film I almost have the sense that I have been dreaming (I had this sensation
also after Close-Up).
There is a gentle rhythm to the film and performances. The
acting is superb – Kiarostami gets such wonderful performances from non-actors
and from the professional actor playing the director.
There is a gentle repetition to the film that serves to focus
my attention and makes me listen more
carefully – story of Houssein, the acting scenes etc.
I was so touched by Houssein’s sincerity – it is wonderful
to watch. I live in a modern society that can be very cynical. It
is such a breath of fresh air to watch these people. I feel better, more human,
having watched the film.
Somehow Kiarostami seems to achieve a great deal by doing
very little. Less Is More!
As with so many of the films of Kiarostami that I watched
this film reminded me of the important things in life.
The final scene is one of great poetry – in the long-shot we
see the wind blowing through the olive trees. The life of Houssein is but a small part in
the story of nature that is constantly unfolding. Somehow it does not seem to
matter what her answer was – it is all part of the vast canvas of nature.
Kiarostami is more interested in looking at life rather than serving the
expectations of the audience who desire a narrative story with a conclusion. In
this way I feel that he succeeds in highlighting humanity and the film left a
very gentle impression on me. I greatly admire Houssein and that remains
undiminished.
I was interested to see Jafar Panahi as an assistant
director within the story of the film.
Taste of Cherry
(1997) 27/2/14 MK2 DVD
This MK2 edition only has French subtitles.
I found this to be an unusual and challenging film.I have the impression of being more relaxed at the end of
the film. I have had this impression on all Kiarostami films that I have
watched up to this point.
Before watching this film I had heard that Mr. Badii is
looking for someone to assist in his planned suicide. So I knew what he was
doing in the car.
Despite knowing this I still found the opening car scenes
difficult to watch – I kept on feeling that he was a sexual predator (does Kiarostami
play on this? – I only need your hands not your mind, it will only take 10
minutes or so, I will pay you well, You need the money etc?). In an extreme
case he could be looking to seriously harm or murder someone. I was struck at
how threatening a car becomes – how vulnerable a passenger can be and how
predatory a driver can be.
Is Kiarostami highlighting how certain groups of people
(particularly where poverty is involved) are open to exploitation?
I greatly admire that Kiarostami does not give us a reason
why Mr Badii is planning his own suicide – what got him to that particular
state of mind is unimportant (it will vary from person to person, place to
place) – Kiarostami wants to shine a light on the state of mind that Mr Badii
is experiencing – I feel it makes the film more universal.
Again I am amazed at the sincerity of the Iranian people
that we see in this film. It is in contrast to the modern society that I live in
and I admire it greatly.
The Afghan trainee priest gives us a Muslim perspective on life,
death and suicide. It is beautiful how Kiarostami leaves the impact to fall on
us gently – like falling snow.
The Turkish man has a profound wisdom based on his life
experience. I saw a parallel with a story involving Buddha teaching a young woman that there is no household that is untouched by the tragedy of death. The
story of the broken finger is clear and a brilliant way to illustrate that it
is our state of mind that blinds us to what is important. He has real dignity,
compassion, strength and wisdom – it is wonderful that a film should highlight
the wisdom of this elderly man.
The final scene depicting the filming of the story is a very
radical move on Kiarostami’s part. He dares to explicitly show us that what we
have seen is in fact fiction – he risks us reacting negatively to all that we
have seen up to this point of the story. I do not believe that Kiarostami is
mocking in any way any previous reactions to what we have seen – I think he is
saying that what is important is that we look at these
human issues and whether or not it is through fiction or documentary does
not matter.
This film seems to have divided people – I do not know if
the final scene is the primary reason for people’s negative reaction. The film
itself is radical in so may ways - I would guess that more than a half of this
film takes place inside a jeep – also the final outcome for Mr Badii is
unclear.
Again I feel richer for having watched this film. I will be
very interested to see, when I rewatch the film, if my judgement is in anyway
influenced by the final scene that I will have already seen. I suspect that the
performances and story are so strong that I will be engaged by the film just as
I was the first time.
This film was a brave choice by Cannes for the Palme D’Or.
I immedietly thought about Bergman’s Summer With Monika
after watching this film – I recently watched Monika for the first time and I
was left feeling so concerned for Monika at the end of the film (so persuasive
was the direction and performance of Harriet Andersson) that when I saw her in
the interview on the Criterion edition as an elderly woman, I was genuinely
relieved to see that she was in good health and that she had led a good life.
Her performance was so powerful that I believed that she was doomed to a life
of destruction and suffering at the film’s end. I was left asking myself how
would the film have been if Bergman had added an extra scene showing us the
film set and Harriet Andersson being directed by Bergman? The thought makes me
admire even more the bravery that Kiarostami showed after having worked so hard
to engage us in this fictional story of Mr Badii.
I was very interested to read Jonathan Rosenbam relating
that the film had been released in Italy with the final scene removed.
Certainly on a philosophical/artistic level this alters the film dramatically.
Again Jafar Panahi was an assistant on the film.
Note 28/4/14 - I watched Three Colours White yesterday evening and I immedietly thought of Mr Badii when I saw the Mikolaj character.
Note 28/4/14 - I watched Three Colours White yesterday evening and I immedietly thought of Mr Badii when I saw the Mikolaj character.
The Wind Will
Carry Us (1999) 1/3/14 MK2 DVD
This edition contains English subtitles.
As I said in my intro I saw this film back in the cinema and
remember being confused – was I meant to understand more than I did?
I noted that this was the fourth film which only contained
music at the film’s end – it seems to be a Kiarostami trait.
If I understand the plot correctly it is this – a team are
sent to a Kurdish village to follow an elderly woman, whose death is believed
to be imminent, in order that they can report then on the traditional burial
ceremony which will follow - I had to find this information on the internet as
it was not clear to me from watching the film.
I felt privileged to have spent 2 hours in this village. I
found the village to be extraordinarily beautiful – texture of the walls,
streets, houses etc. Perhaps the reality for those living there is a much
harsher experience. We (modern city dwellers)so often romanticise this kind of
life.
I came away with the feeling that these people are engaging
with life in a much more meaningful and authentic way than the society in which
I live. The work of these people shaped the land around them and fed them.
When I think about how the society in which I live in seems
dominated by ingratitude and a sense of entitlement I am drawn to the strength
of these people. The agitation of people in modern cities contrasts sharply
with the contentment of these people.
In contrast to the villagers the team leader seems to be
doing nothing of substance. The “importance” of what he is doing seems absurd
against the backdrop of the villagers who must work to survive. His mobile
phone calls seem ridiculous against the rhythm of the village life.
Interestingly there is a strong emphasis on education – the quoting
of poets, kid who is so concerned with his studies.
There is a wonderful integrity to these people and they have
a strong sense of purpose and place in the society.
The film really engaged me even though there is no direct
narrative.
The images are poetic and we get a rare insight into a
traditional way of life. Again, as with all Kiarostami films to date, I felt
all the more rich for having viewed the film.
I understand that Kiarostami decided not to submit any
future flms to film festivals for competition stating he felt he had already
won enough prizes – what a fascinating man!
Ten (2002)4/3/14
MK2 DVD
This edition has English subtitles.
I chose to skip ABC Africa (2001) as this was an assignment that
was commissioned by a section of the United Nations. I wanted to focus on
Kiarostami’s chosen projects in order to see his style develop.
Immedietly the style and feeling of this film felt
different!
The opening scene between the mother and son felt very harsh
to me. I was shocked at how the mother descended into a bitter argument with
her very young son and how she threw her adult problems onto him.
I found it hard to understand why she was picking up these
women in her car. I read somewhere afterwards that she was a taxi driver but I
did not find any other reference to back this up.
It has been written that this film may have been Kiarostami
responding to the criticism that he does not deal with women in his films – he
has stated that the difficulties around filming women are complex in Iran
particularly if men are present.
Certainly through these films we learn something of the
difficulties that women face in Iran and in many countries worldwide – Divorce,
Marriage, Women’s Sense of Duty, Religion, Women’s Sexual Role etc. – the
protagonist is clearly a modern educated woman which contrasts with the elderly
lady who we can surmise is poor, probably from the countryside, uneducated and
strongly religious.
The woman that we follow throughout the film is a complex
and very real character – she is bitter towards her son. I felt a she had a lack
of compassion towards her sister. She is clearly an open minded woman as we can
see in her curiosity towards the 2 female prostitutes that journey in her car
for a short time. She is intelligent, modern (attractive clothing) and determined
(she instigated a divorce). She questions the role of religion. She is an
aggressive driver etc.
The film is very simple – the camera never leaves the car.
In this respect it is radical and goes a step beyond Taste Of Cherry– the
forced intimacy of the car, the confined setting, the intense way that we
observe these characters. It forces us to look at them. It gives us time to
study them perhaps in a way we would not in other settings.
The film did not seem to force any message as far as I could
see – although it is clear that women face certain pressures in Iranian
society.
I somewhat tired of the mother-son arguments – this is true
to life as most conversations of verbal abuse become tiring and difficult to
watch or listen to.
It is a radical experiment in filmmaking – 10 encounters
filmed in the enclosed space of a car. Themes are subtle. There is no
heightened drama. We are given no resolution to the Mother-Son argument. Sister
scene – again no resolution (we do not follow the sisters to the restaurant
etc.)
I was interested to note that he selected the footage from a
total of 23 hours that were filmed.
The music at the end of the film contrasted with the
generally hard style of the film.
It felt like real shift in theme and tone from his previous
films.
I have been writing up to now that Kiarostami’s films left
me feeling relaxed but that changed with this film.
Five (2003) 15/3/14
MK2 DVD
I watched the first segment and then I just flicked quickly
through the other segments.
It felt like the project of an Art Student. All the segments
have the common theme of the tide.
It was fascinating how the interaction of the object with
the tide in Segment 1 became a drama simply because Kiarostami forced us to
watch this real life event that we would otherwise not see unless we were
quietly sitting on this part of the beach ourselves.
All camera shots were static – he did some wonderful
manipulation of the focus/colours in the segment with the dogs.
This feature highlights Kiarostami as a photographer as well
as an experimental film-maker.
I will rewatch sometime when I am in the mood for this kind
of piece.
Shirin (2008)
15/3/14 BFI DVD
It is now 5 years since Ten. Since that feature he seems to
have been only involved in Five, 10 on Ten and Roads of Kiarostami.
I applaud the BFI for publishing this important and
challenging film in an excellent DVD presentation.
From the beginning of the film I was captivated. The image
of women’s faces in a darkened theatre makes for some really remarkable
photography. The headscarves they wear almost act as a frame to their faces and
this makes the photography even more artistic to me.
Throughout the film my attention was competed for by the
subtitled “story” and the “story” reflected in these womens’ faces.
The story is an Iranian type Romeo and Juliet – heightened tragedy,
heightened love, poetry, wisdom, intense suffering. All of this accompanied by
the womens’ faces is very powerful.
The story is told from a woman’s perspective so naturally I
made a connection with the women “watching” the story.
It is profound that I believed I could feel the essence of
these women as I watched – Kiarostami has obviously edited footage of these
women together with certain parts of the narrative story. For example, at
moments where wisdom or life-experience is highlighted in the story he shows us
more elderly women.
I found the images to be full of tenderness and humanity –
was I projecting that onto these women?
I was very compelled by both the narrative story and the
story that I believed I saw in the faces of these women.
I learnt afterwards that the women audience were filmed by Kiarostami in a situation that was completely independent of the Shirin story.
I found the film to be a masterpiece – perhaps my favourite
Kiarostami so far? Visually it is highly original, beautiful (what could be
more beautiful than the expressive faces of women?) and entertaining (the
pacing and editing from face to face has a flowing rhythm that made the 91
minutes pass by effortlessly – quite an
achievement!)
The pairing of the womens’ faces to the
narrative underpins the common humanity that we all share and the complex and
empathetic nature of the female.
Philosophically/Conceptually Challenging – Kiarostami has
reversed the viewing process. Usually we look at the screen – here we look at
the “audience”. It is a bold, brave and radical thing to do. It seems to
comment on the essence of why we watch cinema – to empathise, to feel!.
It raised the question with me - what would it look like if
we filmed an audience viewing different films? What would it be like to watch
an audience looking at Man of Steel? - in contrast what would it be like to
watch an audience watching John Ford’s How Green Was My Valley? Surely by
looking at an audience’s reaction we would get an impression of the quality of
the film that they are viewing?
Shirin really is a Masterpiece – challenging, radical,
visually brilliant. A Milestone of Cinema!
I can see how difficult this film would be difficult to many people
but to those open to the film it will be moving, thought provoking
and satisfying.
I noticed 2 professional Iranian actresses/directors in the
film – Niki Karimi and Fatemeh Motamed-Aria (and of course Juliette Binoche).
Several years ago I bought the DVD of Chacun Son Cinema (2007)
and I remember watching over and over the Kiarostami short feature feature “Where
Is My Romeo”. I thought it was by far the best offering in the collection – it
moves me deeply, touches on our artistic inheritance (Romeo and Juliet) and
validates the power I want cinema to have – namely to be able to move the
spectator and affect a positive change. It was made using the same footage that
was shot for Shirin.
Really I cannot praise this film enough!
(Interesting how I struggled to get through Peter Jackson’s
Return Of The King Extended Edition at about the same time as watching this film
and yet Shirin held my attention throughout)
Here is a very interesting piece that Jonathan Rosenbaum was kind enough to bring to my attention:
Here is a very interesting piece that Jonathan Rosenbaum was kind enough to bring to my attention:
A phone conversation between Chicago
(Saeed-Vafa) and Rome (Kiarostami),
March 17, 2013:
MS:
When you talked about Shirin
in one of your interviews, you said that it was a unique film that could have
changed your career, if you had made it earlier. What did you mean by that?
AK: I wished I had made Shirin earlier to get a better emotional
understanding of women. Shirin was like
a silent, wordless interview with 117 women. You could tell that they were all
thinking silently about their private relationships, and we could see their
emotions in their faces. As Hafez says: “yek
gesseh bish nist game eshgh o in
ajab az har zaban ke mishenavam na
mokarar ast.” (“Love's
sorrow is but one story, but this is the marvel, that from everyone that I hear,
it is never the same.”).
This
was an amazing realization that I hadn’t had earlier. As you know, women haven’t
had pivotal roles in most of my films.
Cetified Copy
(2010) 22/3/14 Criterion BluRay
The Criterion Bluray image is excellent!
As I have been watching all these Kiarostami films it is
apparent to me that he is a very important artist.
The setting is a visual delight – a beautiful Tuscan
village.
Juliette Binoche is simply extraordinary. It is one of the
most captivating performances I have ever seen!
The film cannot be analysed with logic. These 2 characters
play different roles as the film unfolds. It is a radical structure.
Kiarostami once again proves what an innovative and radical
film-maker that he is.
William Shimell was so brave to perform in this film – he is
an opera singer who has never acted before outside of opera! In the documentary
“Let’s See Copie Conforme” it was a delight to hear how harmonious and inspiring
the work was for all involved. Kiarostami is very complimentary to the team and
the team felt in the presence of a master.
Juliette Binoche has a very special presence. I have only
seen her before in “Blue” and I watched that in France at a time when my French
was still too basic to really understand the film. Update 26/4/14 I have just watched Blue and Juliette's performance is simply extraordinary!
I suspect that rewatching Certified Copy will reveal layers and
layers of riches to be discovered.
As I said in the introduction it feels to me that the main
characters suddenly start to morph into archetypes – a loving couple, an
estranged couple, affection, hostility, communication, lack of communication,
hopeful, pessimistic,desire etc. I do not feel the need for any logic in the film – I
am swept along by what the film reveals and I am entirely satisfied when the
film ends.
I thought of the European art house films of France and
Italy – La Notte/ Le Mepris/Beyond The Clouds/Voyage To Italy also Kieslowski Three Colours.
Like Someone In Love (2012) 27/3/14 New Wave
Films UK BluRay
I am always uncomfortable with films that present characters
involved in prostitution that do not make some statement about the pain
that this profession causes the women involved (I have the same problem for
example with Godard’s Vivre Sa Vie). Perhaps I am being naive and idealistic and
maybe some women would respond by saying that they get a sense of satisfaction
from this profession – however, the plight of so many women involved in this
trade is one of terrible suffering and no person should have to undergo such
ordeal in their life. For the sake of these unfortunate women I feel that
people who portray prostitution on film have an obligation not to treat the
subject lightly.
So I do not like the opening scene where the man is trying
to coerce Akiko to work that night. I understand that Japan had (still has?) a
culture of prostitution (geisha) that was imbedded in the society. Perhaps a
section of Japanese women would disagree that it is a life of hardship and real
suffering.
So in this film my own ideals prejudice me towards the film.
I think this film has some cheap tricks – the lovable student who prostitutes
herself for extra money, the cheap scene where they circle the station where
her grandmother is waiting for her, the phone messages left by her grandmother
as she is taken to a client, the spicing-up of the situation whereby the client
is mistaken for her grandfather by her boyfriend, the ending which felt like a
stunt to me.
I appreciate that Kiarostami does not try to force us
towards tears or other emotions however, I find the story to be quite contrived
in order to shock us in a way that felt very un-Kiarostami -like. In this way I
was somewhat unsatisfied by the film.
Whereas in his previous films the end credit music added to
the resonance of what we had just watched – here the Ella Fitzgerald “Like
Someone In Love” seemed like a cheap
trick.
I will be very eager to get my reaction from a second
viewing.
The acting is generally very convincing – as I mentioned in
the intro the windscreen car reflections become truly artistic in this film as
modern Tokyo passes over the image of Akiko and others in the car.
ABC Africa (2001)
29/3/14 MK2 DVD
I left this feature until the end as it was an assignment
requested by a UN department, not an original Kiarostami project.
The remit was to highlight the plight of approx 1.6 million
children and teenagers who had lost 1 or 2 parents to AIDS and civil war in
Uganda. The feature spends time with the people of Uganda more than discusses
the issues the country faces.
Africa has a reputation that women work harder than the men
– I do not know if this generalisation is true or if it applies to just certain
countries in Africa. Certainly the women in this film are inspiring – their
hard work shames us who live in privileged Western societies who remain
ungrateful for what we have. In the “Apres La Guerre” documentary extra there
is a woman who has been waiting for a local grant which will provide her with a
simple hoe with which she will be able to cultivate the land and feed the 11
children that she has taken responsibility for after they have been orphaned.
Really it shakes me to the core to think how imbalanced this world we live in
is!
Abbas Kiarostami brings us into the lives of these people –
in the feature 10 on Ten he discusses how using a hand held digital camera
allowed him to get closer to the people.
Many shots display Kiarostami’s photographic eye – I noted
the market scene with a drumming soundtrack and the passing woman who looks
into the camera.
African people have undergone so many difficulties – more
than any other race they have been exploited for slavery. It still shocks and
embarrasses me that Western people so shamefully degraded these people in the
past – also Africans themselves saw the business opportunity and exploited their
own people. In addition modern Africans have suffered (and continue to suffer!)
terribly at the hands of dictators.
I could not understand the absence of men - I understand that many would have died in
the civil war however the other explanation of AIDS does not make sense to me –
why were the women not dead in approximately equal numbers? How did the men contract the
virus whereas it did not affect the women to the same extent?
I was appalled at the Catholic Church Doctrine that forbade
Family Planning and hence contraception. These people are dying from AIDS! – if
God exists he/she must be outraged at these ignorant teachings of the Catholic
Church.
The feature feels less like an investigative documentary and
more like a portrait of a people. I was disappointed however that Kiarostami
did not give more explanation to highlight the crisis and to discuss what aid
is needed. There is the privileged hotel that the crew are staying in that just
left a slight distaste with me.
The time spent with the Austrian family seemed to me to get
off the point – obviously it is joyful to see a Ugandan baby being offered a
new life however I feel Kiarostami had a duty to look more intensely at what is
needed to help the 1.6 million orphans. Yes it is good that he shows the
balance that children will find happiness and will play games regardless of the
circumstances. However they face an uncertain future and desperate poverty and
this needed to be focused on.
I have mixed feelings about this documentary – yes I admire
much of it and am glad that I learnt about this crisis. However I felt that I
was more like a tourist admiring aspects of their culture and the beautiful
countryside (the lush greens are breathtaking!) rather than someone who was
learning about the specifics of this crisis and what is required to tackle it.
As someone who lives in a Western society I am somewhat
ashamed of the culture that I live in – an unemployed person in my country who
has decided never to work their whole life has a privileged life compared to any of
these inspiring women in this feature. It is really hard to understand why so
often in this world those who deserve the most often get the least and those
who deserve least often have the most.
On same evening I watched some of the feature documentary “10
on Ten”. As I stated previously I did not want to watch too much backround on
Kiarostami that might influence my assessment of his work. So I flicked through
this skipping many parts. I was interested to see how deeply Kiarostami has
thought about all the aspects of film making.
I am more keen to rewatch these films than to read or watch
documentaries on Kiarostami at this point.
No comments:
Post a Comment