Atonement

This image deserves an integral viewing of the movie.

Du Er ikke Alene (1978) / Ernst Johansen and Lasse Nielsen

 Recently, I’ve submerged into the viewing of this so-called groundbreaking classic. Everytime I watch a Nordic film I have a subtle feeling of recognition – there is something that refuses a grandiose and often grotesque meaning in most of my Nordic artistic experiences. Du Er Ikke Alene confirms this perception once more, through the delicate use of cinematic art, you know, like those paintings done by youngsters in aquarels, not masterpieces, not violently beautiful, but giving a taste of certain naiveté and innocence. Not a self-righteous “awww” but rather a complacency in the delicacy of its art.

The plot revolves around boys in a boarding school in Denmark. The main love-action happens between a prepubescent boy and a pubescent boy. Quite stunning for 1978. Hell, even today I have yet to see a gay movie that deals with people under 18. The ease with which the subject is treated is amazingly sweet and tender and relaxed. There are no politically struggles, social inequalities, biased injustices like so many in your face gay propaganda movies nowadays (which have an undisputable social role, no doubt). This is just a plunge into childhood and sexual experimentation and the defining of one’s sexuality. Only this time is not something done with the traumatic, violent depressing connation that adolescents seem to enjoy so much when dealing with personal issues. On the contrary, we have a laidback movie, with hippie-like tendencies and a little socio-cultural mumbo jumbo power to the people acts, only to end with a nice performance art prepared by the boys for the school principal.

Blonde godly faces replenish the screen in sheer beauty and amazement. 15-16 year old effeminate boys take showers and swim together, play, curse and take drugs. It’s an intricate pleasure for homo-erotic fantasies. And the ease of the subject makes one weary of the primitive nature of other communities. While other countries were struggling with gayness and are still struggling now, Denmark was presenting scenes of naked boys in the shower and scenes of boy under 12 kissing in 1978?? Or maybe this was just a show for the cinema, but hell, cinema has always been a pretty accurate medium for the context of the times, and since it was banned all over Europe, but not in the country of its production, this says a lot about that country’s liberties.

Of course Du Er Ikke Alene does not figure in the list of great cinematic experiences, but falls definitely under the time well spent category. Rarely do I experience such delicacy and sensible direction in movies, subtle portrayals and faded-pastel colors that emphasize the discretion of feelings. Somehow, the director manages to describe masturbation, shower scenes, sexual initiation not through cheap pornographic shocking imagery, but through a gentle, distilled, depiction of humanity filled with contemplation and hope.

Abre los Ojos – the real Vanilla Sky

I had no idea Vanilla Sky was a remake. I found it shitty back in 2004 when I’ve initially watched it but nonetheless found some awesome ideas that could’ve been exploited differently by the director. Penelope and Cameron Diaz were both credible in their roles, while Tom Cruise, using his usual anti-charismatic dimwit smile, was nothing more than a turn back from the actual interesting premise. And plus, all that cheaphole overall dramatic cliché effects that Hollywood uses over and over turn me off from an interesting movie.

And only recently I find out Vanilla Sky was a remake after a Spanish movie. Here I come, fancy European creation! Fear not, though. I’m far from a cultural snob. My favorite movie ever is still American. So anyway.

Back to Abre los Ojos.

Tremendous movie. Good casting. Eduardo Noriega and Penelope Cruz (who plays the same role in the US version) have real charisma and give the impression of real people instead of cardboard boxes from Crowe’s adaptation. The story is compelling and makes you want to see what will be going on next. It’s the type of mysterious allure that good movies of this kind have: not confusing enough to make you want to leave, and not clear enough in order to keep you glued to the screen.

After viewing this movie I kept wondering: why is it I like so much this version and why Vanilla Sky was so unappealing? It’s not like the story is dramatically changed or anything. But then I realized I think. It’s the lack of Hollywoodian artifice, both in acting and in visual style that makes Abre Los Ojos so much more film-like and turns you away from the constant feeling you’re watching a blockbuster. Moreover, my distaste of Tom Cruise made it painful to keep watching, so the initial cast was also a better idea. Why on earth did they decide to remake Abre Los Ojos since it didn’t need no makeover whatsoever? The special effects and the makeup are great, the acting is good, everything is put in order. Couldn’t they just distribute it in America or is the American audience too lazy to read subtitles?