Thursday, February 14, 2013

Motifs of Cinema: Love


At one point in Billy Wilder’s masterpiece, The Lost Weekend, helpless alcoholic and sometime writer Don Birnam says, “Love is the hardest thing in the world to write about. It’s so simple. You’ve got to catch it through details.”

That couldn’t be more accurate, and it is exactly what Andrew from Encore’s World of Film and TV has tasked a handful of bloggers to do. Or, more specifically, what I tasked myself to do, after Andrew asked me to choose from a list of themes he thought best-encapsulated 2012.

In his own words, Andrew explains his Motifs in Cinema blogging project:

Motifs in Cinema is a discourse across 22 film blogs, assessing the way in which various thematic elements have been used in the 2012 cinematic landscape. How does a common theme vary in use from a comedy to a drama? Are filmmakers working from a similar canvas when they assess the issue of death or the dynamics of revenge? Like most things, a film begins with an idea - Motifs in Cinema assesses how the use of a common theme across various films changes when utilized by different artists.

Now, as is always the case for blogathons and things of this sort, it was my initial instinct to flip the script on Andrew’s proposed idea, and discuss love in cinema circa 2012 as it relates to everything but romance. Love of isolation (Holy Motors), love of money (Killing Them Softly, Arbitrage, Magic Mike), love of dependency (Oslo, August 31st, Flight, Smashed), love of deceit (Compliance, The Imposter, Killer Joe), and, well, you get it.

But I felt like tackling Andrew’s motif in a more rudimentary fashion. So, below are my thoughts on the various depictions of pure, unadulterated, boundless love as witnessed in films from 2012. Love of love, if you will. I hope you’ll forgive me for getting a little self-reflective toward the end, but when you’re talking about love, anything is fair game.

Amour
What better way to start this list than with the film whose title shares the very theme I’m dissecting? The best way to describe Amour is to classify it as a love story through Michael Haneke’s eyes. Make mention of that, and the film’s tedious pace and gut wrenching honesty both fall into place. Point is, Amour is a different kind of love story. It’s a love that has grown weathered, and slightly bitter. Comfortable, if not forgettable. It’s a love that husband Georges doesn’t know he values, until it is taken away.

Funny thing about my tastes in cinema is that I often find myself more drawn to pain than love. Maybe that’s because more movies get pain right than love (or do they…?), or maybe it’s because I’m endlessly fascinated by the darkness of human nature, as opposed to the light. Somehow, Haneke managed to fit both into Amour. In the most, well… Haneke way possible.

Django Unchained
After my limitless admiration for Django Unchained subsides (if ever so slightly) in the ensuing months, I think one scene will stick out to me above all others. It’s the moment directly after Django verbally manipulates a trio of LeQuint Dickey Mining Co. Employees – he gains their trust, he gets their gun, and he blows them to shit.

Then everything comes together.

John Legend’s magnificent track “Who Did That To You” thunders over the soundtrack, as Jamie Foxx takes his sweet ass time prepping for his final task: collecting weapons, cleansing himself with water, stripping a horse of its saddle. He rides over to three slaves (who, up until this point, wanted Django’s blood more than anyone) and, with perfect, low-key determination, tells one of them to “throw me up that dynamite.” He takes the dynamite and rides off, bareback and mad ass hell, ready to seek revenge and embrace his wife.

If that isn’t a true testament of love, then I sure as shit don’t know what is.

Silver Linings Playbook
The reason why I love Silver Linings Playbook so much is because it is precisely the film I wouldn’t expect to love. A romantic comedy that slips in heavy-handed drama at random, starring a few A-listers, a comedic has been and a legend who hasn’t done anything worthy in years. From scene one, I knew that writer/director David O. Russell was taking a gamble, and at some point, I got lost in his whimsical tale and realized the gamble had paid off.

Another thing that sets the film apart: it’s the story of a man’s love for another woman. A woman we only get to know through his own recollection. Romantically, he couldn’t care less about the young woman he spends most of his time with. And, in the end, Russell asks us to trust that these two have a love that will last. Yeah, I can believe in that.

Rust and Bone
As far as I’m concerned, love as defined by films from 2012 is best epitomized in Jacques Audiard’s Rust and Bone. The film’s central love story is captured in every way I’m drawn to: through pain, doubt, and uncertainty – it’s a love based entirely around circumstance, one that wouldn’t have formed unless X, Y, and Z happened. Well, they did happen, and two people who weren’t meant for one another, suddenly are.

I could say more about the impact that Rust and Bone’s love has had over me, but at this point, it’s better left discovered on your own. The film will be released on DVD stateside on March 18. I implore you to dive in headfirst.

Earrings
I always intended for Earrings to be a love story. Initially, the film was going to begin with a couple nearing the end of their relationship. The girlfriend suffered from debilitating and remorseless depression, which, despite the efforts of her sincere boyfriend, would eventually result in her taking her own life. We would then witness the young man self-destruct in the wake of her suicide – he’d collapse, pick himself back up, fall down again, and, maybe, discover a faint wave of redemption by the end.

Then a few things happened. I told my friend Catherine about the script, and she said it sounded like fun (yeah, her and I have odd definitions of fun), but only if she got to play the lead. So I flipped the two roles and tightened, tightened, tightened. What if we begin after the suicide? What if we only see the boyfriend in flashback? What if we don’t see the boyfriend at all? What if it’s the boyfriend who saves her?

Now, I don’t mean for this post to turn into a philosophical analysis of my own movie. Not in the slightest. The theme here is love, and my reason for bringing up Earrings is because that is precisely what drives the film. Love.

In the months since the film’s release, I’ve been purposefully silent about what the ending means. I knew what the ending meant, because I wrote it, and I could see it no other way. But when people started telling me what they thought it meant, well, it didn’t seem fair for me to “explain” to them what it was all about. There is no explanation. There is no one reasoning for the ending; the ending is a reflection of the viewer, and what they see in the character and interrupt from the material.

No matter what you think the ending to Earrings means, the point is that she has him. She found him. I once toyed with ending the film while Chlo is running toward her love. But that didn’t seem right. She deserved to feel that love again.

Click here to watch my short film, EARRINGS

30 comments:

  1. Love... ain't it grand. When done right. Just as long as it doesn't delve into Nicholas Sparks territory.

    Oh, I know a secret about the new movie that's coming out right now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Love is a many splendored thing (but yes, only when done right).

      Is the movie you know a secret about called Safe Haven? And is the secret that the two protagonists meet, fall in love, fight, make up, live happily ever after? (OR: meet, fall in love, fight, make up, one dies, other realizes it's...okay.)

      Delete
    2. Yeah, that's the one except.... Julianne Hough's character always talk to Cobie Smulders once she arrives in this town as she falls for Josh Duhamel who is a widower.

      Here's the twist... ***SPOILERS***

      Cobie Smulders' character is Josh Duhamel's dead wife who only appears to Julianne Hough....

      ...

      ...

      ...

      WHAT THE FUCK?!!!!!!

      Delete
    3. Wait wait wait, like Sixth Sense shit? Like,she's a fucking... ghost?

      That's horrendous.

      Delete
    4. I know! I read it on the A/V Club's spoiler space and I was aghast at what I read. As a cinephile... I'm insulted that it is willing to go into the lowest common denominator just to make women cry? Fuck you Nicholas Sparks.

      Delete
    5. Dude seriously, that's low even for Sparks' standards. That's beyond laughably awful.

      Delete
  2. I haven't seen all the films you've listed, but Silver Linings and Rust and Bone really captured me. I think because in past decades we've become desensitized to the typical rom-com genre, that when we're hit with a slew of unconventional, hard-hitting love stories, it's hard to grasp. It's good to see some romance with realism!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So glad you liked those two! I agree: rom-com love is dead to me. Give me something new, something raw, something real. Give me love. Romance with realism certainly ain't a bad thing.

      Delete
  3. That's one of the things I really liked about Silver Linings Playbook. You think it'll be the typical Hollywood love story. But it's not.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not at all. I rewatched it last night actually. Damn fine film. Damn fine.

      Delete
    2. I'm with both of you on this, that's what I loved about Silver Linings Playbook as well. Great post! I especially love the picture you used for Django Unchained. That was a great scene.

      Delete
    3. Thanks! Glad you like the Django still, that really was a damn good scene. "Hey there, troublemaker."

      Delete
  4. Great post! I'm really glad you spotlighted Earrings here. Beautiful description of the heart and background of your film.

    Interesting what you said about being attracted to the dark side of human nature rather than the light (in film -- I assume in real life, not so much ;-)). I seem to be most fascinated with the intersection between the two. Either in the same individual (those morally ambiguous characters) or how decent human beings respond when confronted with evil.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks! Your words about Earrings make me so happy. I didn't know if people would be really turned off by the fact that I included it.

      The dark side in film, yes! Not so much in life, no. I like being happy and positive, but I can be very serious as well, you know? "Intense." I'm often called "intense." Which is cool with me. Ha.

      Delete
    2. Well, I don't know you IRL, but you do strike me as having a basically happy, positive attitude and also being *intense.* :-) I'm kind of the same way. I've often been told I "think too much." It's certainly not an insult, but it often gets me in trouble.

      Delete
    3. I think the thing that gets me into trouble the most in "real life" is my inability to NOT speak my mind. I always call it like I see it - at work, in relationships, with friends - and that can definitely scare people (and cause me to apologize a lot). Ha.

      Delete
    4. Speaking your mind is a good thing -- I admire that -- it's all about how you do it. ;-) One of the nicest compliments anyone paid me -- many years ago -- was to say that I have the ability to speak my mind directly in a very kind and tactful way. I don't know whether that's true, but it's a skill I'm continually working on cultivating. But yes, being direct and honest freaks many people out, particularly here in the South. Ha ha!

      Delete
    5. Yes, yes, how indeed. That is the key. Gotta speak that truth though!

      Delete
  5. I love that you wrote about your film. I'm so ashamed that I haven't watched it yet. But I promise that I will carve out some time and do it immediately.

    You know, Richard Brody in the New Yorker was trying to take Zero Dark Thirty to task for letting the last shot be a reflection of the viewer which just infuriated me. I don't understand in any way how that's a flaw, why everything has to be spelled out implicitly. I love that you had that much trust in your creation.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wow man, thanks so much for this comment. Seriously.

      Hey dude, the fact that you're even interested in watching it is awesome enough. No rush at all about watching it, it'll always be there!

      I completely agree with your thought about ZD30, and if I'm being honest, I think asking people to think for themselves (in terms of film, or maybe art in general) can really intimidate people. I hope that doesn't make me sound like an ellist douchebag, but my point is, yeah, what's wrong with asking us to think a little?

      Delete
  6. I knew you'd use Rust and Bone here, and wisely so. The way the film is so unassuming about the "romance" (like it is about everything really) is one of its strongest aspects. There is no definitive moment, things just fall into place due to happenstance which mirrors the way romance tends to happen in real life.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hell yeah man, so glad you're a Rust and Bone admirer. I couldn't agree with you more about the romance in that film.

      Thanks again for letting me be a part of your blogging project. I had a lot of fun writing this up.

      Delete
  7. Glad to see you took the LOVE angle as I ended up focusing on MARRIAGE for my post. I have not seen Django and Amour but nice to see Silver Linings on here and your beautifully-made film Earrings. Well done Alex.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ooohhh I need to read your post ASAP, and I agree, that is good that we took separate routes.

      In regards to your Earrings comment... wow Ruth, thanks so much for saying that. Honestly made my day. :)

      Delete
  8. What a lovely post! You are right O.Russell kinda asks us to buy the fact these two love each other in the end, but I loved how there were those subtle things between them that implied the feelings are growing - like when Pat looks at Tiffany whenever she helps him with something, each time with growing devotion.

    I haven't seen Amour yet, it just sounds so excruciating and heavy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Aww thanks! SLP was sort of remarkable in the way it showed the slow evolution of love. I really admire it for that.

      Amour is definitely devastating. Heavy heavy shit.

      Delete
  9. Great post man! It's awesome to see your vision for Earrings connect with other films that you loved last year.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks man! I didn't want to seem trite in mentioning Earrings, but I'm glad people enjoyed reading a little more about it!

      Delete
  10. LOVEly post, haha. Can't really argue with any of these choices, was fantastic putting Earrings on the list and that little anecdote has only enhanced my appreciation for (among many other things, of course) the writing of the film, which is really magnificent. Excellent stuff Alex.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wow, thanks man! I honestly, genuinely, seriously, will never forget the support you've shown that film. It'll stay with me forever.

      Delete