May 1968. That month and that year, all in particular, were a redefining moment all over the world in the historical, cultural, artistic, political and social
context of its era. It was a time for a revolution that didn't necessarily changed things but at least the youth tried. You have the ongoing Vietnam War, Cold War in
constant rise; protests in many countries - being the one in France against DeGaulle one of the most significant ones; military intervention in Latin Americas;
black power, women's liberation, sexual liberation; it had a bit of everything and since things weren't changing all that much thanks to a powerful system that refused to reverse their policies the mankind's hope for a better future would be or
would happen (people thought) in 1969. Nothing changed except that the years of innocence had gone and what came in the next decade was that the loud cries and screams
of the unheard youth and minorities got louder and louder enough to expand for a gradual change of pace and costumes. But hey...at least they put a man on the moon!
Back to May '68, Bernardo Bertolucci was a young filmmaker who lived through all of that and made two different movies in two different times about that particular time in history. The first was "Partner.", released around the mentioned events; the second was his last best work "The Dreamers" (2003). While the latter captures the essence, the echoes, the sight and the nostalgia of being young at a revolutionary time, the other film was the look from an observer of events reporting his ideas and how he's going to use it, to blend with the crowd and go against the system, to fight everything that's wrong with the establishment. Art imitates life and vice-versa, and Bertolucci using of such notion created two distinctive perception of time and effect, proving a right theory. It's no longer a theory, it's a fact. "Partner." is a look on the possibilities on how art and artists could change the world as long as they could get out of their bedrooms and be revolutionary. They tried but they failed.
On the other hand, when "The Dreamers" concludes with the Paris protests, the barricades and people fighting with the police, the director is telling us that getting out of the room and fighting for a noble cause to change the world is worth doing but...he never shows us the aftermath because the title says it all. It's all about dreamers, a generation of idealistic dreamers but they could only make a revolution inside their bedrooms, in their intimacy but not gathering in the streets. The trio of youngsters of "The Dreamers" aren't so much different than the double character played by Pierre Clémenti in "Partner.", an almost forgotten film by Bertolucci, appropriate for its time but one that didn't find much of an audience, unlike the 2003 film got.
The film has its basis on Dostoyesvsky's "The Double" and what Bertolucci does is put into his own current context in Italy. Jacob is a young art student trying to develop a play that breaks concepts, presents new artistic views but he's too stranded within himself or the life around him. Everything seems to suffocate him or block him.
Suddenly, a second version of himself - the double Jacob - appears to him trying to make him come out of his shell, be bold, create his revolutionary work with his mates, and challenge the political status quo of his era. The encouragement the original Jacob needed is a turning point where he frees himself from the ordinary, the routine; dares to put firm terms into his relationship with a girl; and allows him to be more engaged with his art and adequally present to his colleagues what's the real idea they must put into practice either if doing a play or a movie that can change the game, challenge the system whether making a film about everything, shoot it as you like it or to be like Godard (that's the part that kills me a little, since Bernardo is "revealing" the idol behind the idea. If you look at "Partner." you'll find that it rings more like Godard than Bertolucci); or you can cause commotions, blackouts, stop a whole city in order to crash the system and allow people to see that there's still love and freedom outside of leaders telling us what to do.
Let's take out the masks and present the real version of ourselves is what the film tells us, but in doing so it reveals a painful truth to us: we all have a double inside of each of us, and it's not necessarily a better version of ourselves but it's definitely more daring, more risky, more unconventional and a version that isn't much presentable or suitable to all people, to society in general or even to our relatives. But truth be told, that second version despite facing more dangers or more opposition is a true part of ourselves, we don't lie to anyone anymore, we don't fear things anymore. That's a revolutionary act, to stop being so borgeouise and join the crowd to make the world a better place to live for, a more fair place and with people who don't need masks as tools of survival. Why? Because we'll be no longer living on a sick and polluted society filled with hipocrisy, hatred and contempt. There's space for love, friendship, trust and embrace all the noble causes. Jacob doesn't use of those notions but he transmits such things, him and his double, effectively made without special effects, it's all mirrors and camera tricks that make us believe Pierre Clementi has a clone.
Obviously that the cinematic art form used of this device of a double (as if it were real, one guy split in two) to stir audiences into thinking, reacting and if possible to liberate that hidden part we hide because we're too frightened, too ashamed and mostly because we won't find similar allies to share our views, just as much Jacob finds out as the movie progresses and sees that his mates abandoned him right after the exposition of his idealistic rebelness. Looking through the glass of life and experiences, to reach our double is easy but to present it to ourselves and to the world, freely and without reservations can be dangerous and aren't accepted by society - and gotta admit, most of the time the 2nd version of ourselves isn't all the artsy or one that wants to change the world. Most of the time the double elevates our egoistic side so we can feel free from the pressures of the world (addictions, change of behaviors, you name it; so we are partners of ourselves...two in one and nothing else. Before changing the world, start the change with yourself, said Gandhi and that perfectly applies to Jacob, an almost useless tool to the world who has the ideas to break it from the frame but can't barely develop a good change inside himself and his relations, his acceptance in knowing that somethings cannot be changed. He belongs to the youth culture of '68, they have plenty in common but unfortunately he's not mature enough to be there with them; nor even it's in a place where he can use his ideas to give a message to the system.
While in France, youngsters were surrounded by barricades of objects to prevent police movements, Jacob's barricade consists of a room full of books, so many books growing and growing into the space, filling his brain with thoughts and ideas yet filling his eyes with tears because he can't move. The books aren't stopping him from moving or walking, it's more like a paralysis of the brain. So many interesting ideas to change the world around him but it's too difficult to put them together and go to action. Thankfully, his double is smarter than him and sees reality with more clarity...let's just say it isn't pretty but it's the reality "both" have to face.
Bertolucci's film is not your ordinary Bertolucci film filled with controversy, romance or large athmospheres as "The Last Emperor". In fact, it's possibly his most difficult work to follow due to its unorthodox structure filled with cuts, sparse dialogues and monologues from the main character, who rambles from most of the time which some may consider pretentious or too random to follow, in simple words the man just went nuts. Bertolucci didn't make a film that had its personal style and touch; it's pretty much like what was Godard doing, therefore it's a Godard-like experience rather than one from the Italian master and one may find it disorienting. To me, "Partner." is a revealing, artistic and challenging work that mirrors the experience of what being an idealistic young person was back in 1968: courageous but not much practic; to understand and fight reality but unfortunately without having the necessary weapons to fight a good battle - today we have the internet, social medias, petitions which are all good but on the other hand the art got too limited to cause a commotion and shake the world; it's all too limited. The books, the films, the music are all tools that became mass product to entertain and no longer make us reflect the time in which we live in. It's hard to feel in tune with the current status of our world.
The close we get from causing a mass reaction in our society is by capturing moments of unjustice, chaos and brutality with our mobiles. It's not cinema, it's not art but it shapes the world we live in, it becomes news and with luck we can make a change in the world but not as a whole. On a final note, "Partner." gives Pierre Clémenti's best performance of all along with Marcel from "Belle de Jour". He has plenty of range, expressions, the movie is all his and he convincingly plays both the troubled Jacob and the confident Jacob to such an extent that there are times when the audience is no longer sure of which Jacob is out in the world causing a revolution. What can I say...it's different. 8/10.
Back to May '68, Bernardo Bertolucci was a young filmmaker who lived through all of that and made two different movies in two different times about that particular time in history. The first was "Partner.", released around the mentioned events; the second was his last best work "The Dreamers" (2003). While the latter captures the essence, the echoes, the sight and the nostalgia of being young at a revolutionary time, the other film was the look from an observer of events reporting his ideas and how he's going to use it, to blend with the crowd and go against the system, to fight everything that's wrong with the establishment. Art imitates life and vice-versa, and Bertolucci using of such notion created two distinctive perception of time and effect, proving a right theory. It's no longer a theory, it's a fact. "Partner." is a look on the possibilities on how art and artists could change the world as long as they could get out of their bedrooms and be revolutionary. They tried but they failed.
On the other hand, when "The Dreamers" concludes with the Paris protests, the barricades and people fighting with the police, the director is telling us that getting out of the room and fighting for a noble cause to change the world is worth doing but...he never shows us the aftermath because the title says it all. It's all about dreamers, a generation of idealistic dreamers but they could only make a revolution inside their bedrooms, in their intimacy but not gathering in the streets. The trio of youngsters of "The Dreamers" aren't so much different than the double character played by Pierre Clémenti in "Partner.", an almost forgotten film by Bertolucci, appropriate for its time but one that didn't find much of an audience, unlike the 2003 film got.
The film has its basis on Dostoyesvsky's "The Double" and what Bertolucci does is put into his own current context in Italy. Jacob is a young art student trying to develop a play that breaks concepts, presents new artistic views but he's too stranded within himself or the life around him. Everything seems to suffocate him or block him.
Suddenly, a second version of himself - the double Jacob - appears to him trying to make him come out of his shell, be bold, create his revolutionary work with his mates, and challenge the political status quo of his era. The encouragement the original Jacob needed is a turning point where he frees himself from the ordinary, the routine; dares to put firm terms into his relationship with a girl; and allows him to be more engaged with his art and adequally present to his colleagues what's the real idea they must put into practice either if doing a play or a movie that can change the game, challenge the system whether making a film about everything, shoot it as you like it or to be like Godard (that's the part that kills me a little, since Bernardo is "revealing" the idol behind the idea. If you look at "Partner." you'll find that it rings more like Godard than Bertolucci); or you can cause commotions, blackouts, stop a whole city in order to crash the system and allow people to see that there's still love and freedom outside of leaders telling us what to do.
Let's take out the masks and present the real version of ourselves is what the film tells us, but in doing so it reveals a painful truth to us: we all have a double inside of each of us, and it's not necessarily a better version of ourselves but it's definitely more daring, more risky, more unconventional and a version that isn't much presentable or suitable to all people, to society in general or even to our relatives. But truth be told, that second version despite facing more dangers or more opposition is a true part of ourselves, we don't lie to anyone anymore, we don't fear things anymore. That's a revolutionary act, to stop being so borgeouise and join the crowd to make the world a better place to live for, a more fair place and with people who don't need masks as tools of survival. Why? Because we'll be no longer living on a sick and polluted society filled with hipocrisy, hatred and contempt. There's space for love, friendship, trust and embrace all the noble causes. Jacob doesn't use of those notions but he transmits such things, him and his double, effectively made without special effects, it's all mirrors and camera tricks that make us believe Pierre Clementi has a clone.
Obviously that the cinematic art form used of this device of a double (as if it were real, one guy split in two) to stir audiences into thinking, reacting and if possible to liberate that hidden part we hide because we're too frightened, too ashamed and mostly because we won't find similar allies to share our views, just as much Jacob finds out as the movie progresses and sees that his mates abandoned him right after the exposition of his idealistic rebelness. Looking through the glass of life and experiences, to reach our double is easy but to present it to ourselves and to the world, freely and without reservations can be dangerous and aren't accepted by society - and gotta admit, most of the time the 2nd version of ourselves isn't all the artsy or one that wants to change the world. Most of the time the double elevates our egoistic side so we can feel free from the pressures of the world (addictions, change of behaviors, you name it; so we are partners of ourselves...two in one and nothing else. Before changing the world, start the change with yourself, said Gandhi and that perfectly applies to Jacob, an almost useless tool to the world who has the ideas to break it from the frame but can't barely develop a good change inside himself and his relations, his acceptance in knowing that somethings cannot be changed. He belongs to the youth culture of '68, they have plenty in common but unfortunately he's not mature enough to be there with them; nor even it's in a place where he can use his ideas to give a message to the system.
While in France, youngsters were surrounded by barricades of objects to prevent police movements, Jacob's barricade consists of a room full of books, so many books growing and growing into the space, filling his brain with thoughts and ideas yet filling his eyes with tears because he can't move. The books aren't stopping him from moving or walking, it's more like a paralysis of the brain. So many interesting ideas to change the world around him but it's too difficult to put them together and go to action. Thankfully, his double is smarter than him and sees reality with more clarity...let's just say it isn't pretty but it's the reality "both" have to face.
Bertolucci's film is not your ordinary Bertolucci film filled with controversy, romance or large athmospheres as "The Last Emperor". In fact, it's possibly his most difficult work to follow due to its unorthodox structure filled with cuts, sparse dialogues and monologues from the main character, who rambles from most of the time which some may consider pretentious or too random to follow, in simple words the man just went nuts. Bertolucci didn't make a film that had its personal style and touch; it's pretty much like what was Godard doing, therefore it's a Godard-like experience rather than one from the Italian master and one may find it disorienting. To me, "Partner." is a revealing, artistic and challenging work that mirrors the experience of what being an idealistic young person was back in 1968: courageous but not much practic; to understand and fight reality but unfortunately without having the necessary weapons to fight a good battle - today we have the internet, social medias, petitions which are all good but on the other hand the art got too limited to cause a commotion and shake the world; it's all too limited. The books, the films, the music are all tools that became mass product to entertain and no longer make us reflect the time in which we live in. It's hard to feel in tune with the current status of our world.
The close we get from causing a mass reaction in our society is by capturing moments of unjustice, chaos and brutality with our mobiles. It's not cinema, it's not art but it shapes the world we live in, it becomes news and with luck we can make a change in the world but not as a whole. On a final note, "Partner." gives Pierre Clémenti's best performance of all along with Marcel from "Belle de Jour". He has plenty of range, expressions, the movie is all his and he convincingly plays both the troubled Jacob and the confident Jacob to such an extent that there are times when the audience is no longer sure of which Jacob is out in the world causing a revolution. What can I say...it's different. 8/10.