Reviews

As an acronym, CODA stands for Children of Deaf Adults. As a word, Coda means the terminal portion of a musical piece. Seen in this context, the title seems to be very appropriate. Our protagonist, Ruby is the child of deaf adults. She is gifted musically. In essence, the film deals with the terminal portion of her childhood, when she has to choose between music, which is her passion and her family. Ruby has always had it a bit harder than most children because she is the conduit between her family and the rest of the world. In a way, she doesn't belong to both the worlds. Music is her only refuge but if she chooses to go to music school, she would have to leave the family business at a very crucial time.

Perhaps the best thing about this movie is the sensitive portrayal of Ruby's family. The characters are all very relatable. The parents are scared to let their baby go into a world of music because they are unable to share it with her. They fear that they would lose her completely to an unknown world. Ruby's mother even asks her not to leave, making Ruby feel very resentful. A POV scene where Ruby's father is sitting among the crowd at her choir recital is particularly well done. It beautifully puts the viewer in the father's shoes and makes us realize how isolated he (and Ruby's mom & brother) must be feeling at that moment. The parents also realize that Ruby has had to grow up too fast. The scene where Ruby's mom tells her that she was worried that she would fail her as a mother is a beautiful example of effective communication without any verbal dialogue. Ruby's brother is a flawed and yet a very relatable character too. Since his little sister can hear, the family is more dependent on her and this hurts his pride and self-esteem. He is the only one in the family who believes that the family could manage the business without Ruby. He is confident that given the right circumstances, the hearing people will soon learn to interact with deaf people, and he's quite right about that!

In a particularly beautiful scene, when Ruby's teacher, Mr. V asks her how she feels when she sings, she finds herself unable to find the right english words, and so, she uses ASL to describe the overwhelming sensation.

Despite its serious subject matter, the movie has many comedic elements too, some of which are genuinely funny. In particular, Ruby's father has a terrific sense of humor!

The film does have some flaws like the absence of any interpreters during court hearing and medical appointments, but these minor quibbles aside, the film is very deserving of the Academy award!

In this 90s drama film, Laura is a Finnish archeology student in Moscow, who wants to visit the Kanozero Petroglyphs in Murmansk. Her emotionally unavailable girlfriend makes the arrangements but bails out at the last moment. Worse yet, she is stuck in the train compartment with a boorish Russian miner, Ljoha. She is horrified at the prospect of spending 3 days and 2 nights in the company of this emotionally unstable man. Another Finnish character appears on the scene after a while and Laura helps him out. However, he turns out to be a crook and a thief. Thus it is that Laura finds herself fraternizing with Ljoha. On the surface, her behaviour is foolhardy, and at first, I struggled to understand her motivations. But later on, I realized that she is a drowning woman and she has reached a point where it doesn't matter who offers her a hand. Her desperation to belong is intense and she perhaps starts seeing the same reflected in Ljoha too.

Ljoha came along as a revelation here. His character showed great personal growth as the film progressed. He is a young man, perhaps an orphan, who has been deeply hurt and abused. He hates all humanity because humans, especially those belonging to 'high society', have never done him any good. However, he slowly realizes that even though Laura is qualified and cultured, she is vulnerable too. This is when he starts to care for her. At the end, the way he pulled out all the stops, showed a selflessness and generosity which is beyond words. It's surprising to see how different people love differently. Laura's girlfriend didn't even bother to check the right season for her to visit the petroglyphs, or perhaps she knew and still wanted to be rid of Laura. But Laura lucked out as she finally found the person who is capable of great love. He may have some rough edges to him but like the Babushka told Laura, she has found herself a good person!

This movie has strong political undercurrents but what strikes me the most about this film is the humanity beneath it all. The film reminds me that there have been innumerable instances where decent people were made to pay the price for standing up for their beliefs. What is much more interesting though is that the good folks do not lose their dignity, compassion and humanity even in their harsh surroundings. The women prisoners help the men undergoing 're-education' with their tasks. Even in the face of great cruelty, the characters retain the will to live and love. The professor's character is drawn as a beacon of light. The young couple's love story is wonderful too and especially heartening is all the help that their fellow sufferers offer them! I love how the guy keeps guessing in vain what the girl wants. He does figure out that she doesn't want chocolates or cigarettes. What she does want though is love! Yes, the film is a bit mushy but overall, it is a great film.

I wanted to watch a feel good movie today and so i picked this one. Honestly, I wasn't expecting a whole lot from the film except freshness and warmth. But boy was I in for a disappointment! This film tries to be warm, but fails. However, my actual problem was with the banality of the central premise.

This film is superficial with a capital S. In particular, I found the main character to be especially superficial. Besides the fact that she blows away her life savings on a dress that she knows she would never be able to wear, there's the issue of the fickleness of her romantic intentions. She is flattered by the French gentleman's attention but when she realizes that he isn't interested in her romantically, she goes right back and only then deigns to grant a dance to a sweet old friend who has been there for all along. Eyeroll!

This is a wonderful movie depicting how art can bring joy to people. Maud is a young woman suffering from juvenile rheumatoid arthritis whose family, and society in general, have very little regard for her. And yet, this frail and somewhat disabled woman has a lot of grit and determination. I can imagine how bleak her circumstances would have been, given the time period in which she was born. So great is her determination to be happy that she walks out of her aunt's house and decides to chart the course of her own life. Her employer, and later on, husband isn't the most sympathetic character, but Maud very astutely figures out that deep down, he is a good man. She decides to make it work with him. And she ends up having a long and happy marriage.

What makes this movie so beautiful is that it has a heart to it. To put it simply, if a bit whimsically, the movie cleared the dust of everyday life from my mind and made me see what it is that really matters in life. This is the true purpose of art and is precisely why art will always be important for human existence. The artist Maud Lewis can serve as an inspiration to everyone who wants to be happy but sometimes is deterred by the circumstances in life. The film showcases Maud's point of view so simply, and yet so organically, that it will make every viewer review their own life and at least try to be a bit happier. I sure am glad that I got to watch this gem!

I must confess that I like the 1957 film so much that I didn't think that a remake could be any good. But, I'm always glad when great artists prove me wrong! Nikita Mikhalkov has adapted the screenplay beautifully to the Russian context. The people of Caucasus, especially Chechens, have had a very troubled relationship with Russians since the history of time. The film also doesn't shy away from showing prejudice against Jews too. Mikhalkov's Russia isn't perfect and neither is this film. The latter does have its plot holes and yet, it is an engaging character study.

The dilemma at the end dealing with the choice between life or liberty for the young Chechen prisoner is an interesting twist and so is the very human response of the jury in that context. I also liked how the original dissenter came back to give the bird a choice whether it wanted to stay or leave.

This is a movie with many hidden (cache) themes such as colonialism, racism, surveillance, security, adoption, marriage, trust, revenge, guilt, suicide, familial bonds, emotional adultery, kidnapping, etc. Slowly, they reveal themselves as the movie progresses.

An upper middle class couple gets disturbed by a series of surveillance tapes that threaten their sense of security. Gradually, the tapes get more personal and sinister, revoking a sense of long buried guilt in the male protagonist, Georges. When he was 6, he manipulated his parents to stop them from adopting a destitute kid (Majid, whose parents were brutally killed by the French police), thereby changing his life forever. He was put into a foster home & has since then lived in poverty & deprivation. Now a middle aged man, Majid is deeply unhappy with his circumstances in life. Faced with these facts, Georges feels too guilty to share this with his wife. The frustrated wife leans on to a friend for moral support. Their son, Pierrot is uncomfortable with his mother's closeness to the male family friend & rebels by not telling his parents about staying with a friend. The parents assume that he has been kidnapped by Majid & his son. When Pierrot returns home the next day, Majid invites Georges to his home & cuts his own throat in front of the deeply shocked Georges. In the last scene, Majid's son talks to Pierrot after school. Perhaps these two planted the tapes together? Or was it one of the adults who were behind it? The film does not provide easy answers but it does pose very pertinent questions about the topics which are relevant even 18 years after it was made.

This is a wonderful film even though it has misogynistic undertones, but I guess we need to make concessions for the time period that it depicts. Sakura Nishi is a naive nurse who gets thrown in the middle of a war which she is too young to really understand or care about. On her first night shift she gets raped by the recovering soldiers. Even so, she does not lose her humanity. She helps the soldiers in every possible way & I mean every possible way! Unfortunately, her help makes a soldier realize what he would be missing for the rest of his life, leading to a tragedy that she holds herself accountable for. She falls in love with a doctor who has become addicted to morphine in a bid to get some sleep after the daily horror of deciding who gets amputated & who gets left to die. She even follows him to the frontlines of the war just so that she can be with him.

The movie masterfully portrays the tragedies of the comfort women & of the younger nurse who gets shell shocked.

Oddly, Sakura (Cherry blossom, which is actually very short-lived) is the only character who survives the ordeal at the end!

Overall, a great movie. The female protagonist is a bit too good for my taste, but I do understand her motivations.

This film features one of the most beautiful portrayals of family. Hats off to Mr. Kore-eda for treating the subject matter with such maturity and nuance. And what a phenomenal actress Sakura Ando is! As Nobuyo, she really is the 'mother' in the family. She may be living on the fringes of the society but each member of her family knows that she loves them. Lily Frankie is also wonderful as the father figure, Osamu.

The movie is rife with poignant scenes especially those involving mother-daughter, father-son and sibling bonding. The relationship between the male and female protagonist has also been captured with just the right amount of emotion and tenderness. The 'son' feels jealous when the 'daughter' is introduced in the family and the parents shower her with affection, and yet he loves his 'sister' too. The 'sister' waits outside in the cold when her jealous 'brother' doesn't return home after refusing to accept her as a sibling. The 'father' tackles the situation with a natural finesse that most fathers would kill to possess. The 'mother' tells the 'daughter' that it wasn't her fault that her parents were abusive towards her and that the abuse is not part of the love. The mother feels that little girl has chosen them as her new family. In a powerful scene, when told that children need their mothers, Nobuyo says that only mothers think so and that giving birth doesn't automatically make someone a mother. One can't help but sympathize with this woman who is incapable of having children of her own but loves her foster children better than their biological mothers do. The family's beach trip leads to a tender moment between father and son when the father assures the son that the changes that he's been experiencing in his mind and body are a natural part of growing up to be a man. The scene where Nobuyo tells the son about her actual parents is very beautiful too. She also admits that the foster son is too good for the likes of them and that he would be better off with his biological parents. Lastly, the climax scene with the little girl missing her foster family is also quite potent.

A major reason why the film is so phenomenal is that it forces us to shed our judgement goggles and see the flawed characters with empathy. This film raised a lot of questions for me. The biggest issue is of course that of theft, but can there be extenuating circumstances? Is it okay for the family to be teaching the young children how to steal? Is it fair to call it a kidnapping when the family took in the little abused girl albeit without legally adopting her? Should the parents who are abusive towards their children have any rights on them? Is it okay for the grandma to guilt her husband's illegitimate son into giving her money when she isn't telling them about their daughter? Lastly, if at the end, all the members of the foster family are miserable without each other, do these people not belong together?

And then there are some issues that the movie should have answered but didn't. Why is Aki working in a fetish club when she has parents who can provide for her? Why does grandma not tell her parents about her? The foster son admits that he got caught on purpose. Was it simply to save his sister from getting caught or was it because he was growing up & realizing that their way of life was incorrect? However, instead of making me unsure about the film, these unanswered questions are making me curious about the story behind the incorporation of each member into the family. Perhaps a prequel would help! Take a hint Mr. Kore-eda!

Wow! I'm absolutely gobsmacked with this one! It is a simple yet powerful portrait of family life. Cait is the quintessential middle child from a large dysfunctional family who has never got an ounce of affection from anyone around her. As a result, she feels like a fish out of water who fails to find a sense of belonging at her family or at school. Without discussing with her, her parents decide to send her to live with a middle aged couple who are her mother's distant relatives. Her foster family is kind, affectionate and yet, broken in its own way. It is heartening to see how these aching hearts are spun together into a beautiful kinship within which each individual shows a lot of personal growth. In a way, all these three people are good for each other. Cait's foster mother is very patient with Cait and takes time to teach her things, something that has never happened to Cait before. She is sensitive to Cait's needs and handles the bedwetting and her first visit to a wake like a pro. Her foster father likewise teaches her how to tend to the animals and helps her with her reading by encouraging her to read Heidi during bedtime. With her foster family, Cait feels cherished and loved.

Cait's biological family however is very different. The father speaks English and is possibly not from the same community as the mother and her family. Cait's foster mom clearly can't stand him, which is natural because who would like a person who cheats on his wife and says that his children eat too much, indirectly implying that they are the reason that he is so impoverished! Cait's biological mother is busy with the baby and hardly has any time for her older children. She doesn't seem to be excited when Cait returns home after a long absence. Cait's sisters are also indifferent towards her. Given the circumstances, I can imagine Cait's sense of bereavement when her foster family is leaving her with her parents.

It is hard to believe that it is the director's first feature film. Most scenes have been composed so beautifully that they feel like a work of art. Particularly impressive ones include those with the well, the cookie, the bath, the running and even those depicting Cait doing various chores around her foster home!

This film is truly a rare gem!

What a wonderful film this is! It is a heartbreakingly honest portrayal of poverty. Two grandmothers struggling to keep their families together. Their stories are linked by a single incident when one's grandson murders another's grandson. That divergence notwithstanding, the parallels between their stories are uncanny and hence the singular 'Lola' of the title. I couldn't help but feel love and respect for these wonderful grandmas. Both these fragile yet determined ladies brave atrocious weather and many other hardships for the love of their grandsons. Life throws so many indignities their way and yet they manage to keep going. It's incredible what the human spirit can endure!

Lola Sepa is the victim's grandmother. We see her in the beginning of the film trying to light a candle at the spot where her grandson was murdered. Her frail arthritic body, the rain and the wind make it an almost impossible task and yet she somehow manages to light the candle. Then she goes straight to buy a coffin. Just when you start to wonder how she manages to be so stoic given the circumstances, she sees the grandson's body at the undertaker's and the poor thing loses her composure for a while (one thing that bugged me was the relative detachment of her daughter who seemed to be almost unaffected by the death of such a young family member). This is the moment when lola Sepa transcends the celluloid medium and feels like a real person. One can see all of Lola Sepa's love and all her hope of a better life come to naught. At the police station, she comes to know that the suspected murderer has been arrested (It is here that we meet lola Puring for the first time). When the coffin reaches lola Sepa's home, she snaps at the carriers and tells them to be careful since it's her grandson in there. She then decides to pawn her pension card so that she can pay for the funeral expenses. Still falling short of money, she goes from door to door on a boat in her neighbourhood to raise money for the funeral. At the court, she needs to go to the washroom but it is being repaired and so she's unable to use it. At the funeral gathering, she discovers fish in their backyard pool. This brings unexpected joy among the entire gathering and they happily start fishing and collecting the fish in buckets! Humanity is fickle that way; the smallest of things can make us happy or sad! The funeral procession on boats is a moving spectacle. Lola Sepa is especially displeased by the prospect of having to go for an out-of-court settlement. However, realizing the inevitability of it all, she snaps at her little grandsons to vent out her anger.

Lola Puring is the murderer's grandmother. She is a vegetable seller and is taking care of her invalid brother too. She expresses her love through food. Infact, when we see her first, she's bringing food for her jailed grandson, an act that she repeats many times. She also cooks her other grandson's favorite meal and the sheer joy on her face while she's serving it is so palpable that she is no longer a character for the viewer, but a real loving grandma! She then pawns off her TV so that she can raise money to obtain an out-of-court settlement for the murder case. She cheats her customers and even asks her sister's family for financial help, which of course they are unable to provide, being poor themselves. She lies to her sister telling her that she needs the money because her grandson is in the hospital. She's quite resourceful in the way she pays the autorickshaw driver with potatoes. At the railway station, she manages to sell the duck eggs that were gifted by her sister! Moreover, she tries to sell off the rest of the vegetables but the potential customer himself is arthritic, so that deal falls through. Finally, she mortgages her house to raise more money. She carefully sews all the accumulated money in her skirt pocket and manages to obtain an out-of-court settlement from lola Sepa's family. The two lolas bond over arthritis and all the prohibited foods, given their age. While leaving the court, a convoy of cars and motorbikes forces both families to wait for a while. The contrast of the rich and poor person's lives could not have been more apparent!

Overall, it is such a beautiful and powerful film that it will haunt the viewer for a long time. The two lolas are unbelievably good. Their love, grief and fortitude are very real. It is a pity that so few people have watched this gem of a movie!

This is the story of a father and his three daughters. The father is a widower living in a village in Central Anatolia. He is a simple man who takes great pride in the fact that he is good friends with the village chief. He feels that he has done well by all his daughters. After all, he found them good foster homes where they were kept in relative comfort in exchange for looking after their foster siblings! Thus, he finds himself to be out of options when one by one all his daughters return back to the village after losing their positions in their foster homes in the city. He does not understand the emotional needs of his daughters and yet one can't help but feel sorry for the poor guy. He is an old-fashioned chap who is ill-equipped to handle the crises in his daughters' lives without their mother at his side.

Reyhan, the eldest daughter, is a new mother. Her baby is the pride and joy of her life. As the story unfolds, we learn that she had an affair with her foster father, Mr. Necati, who also happens to be a doctor. At some point in the story, she hints that Mrs. Necati once caught them in flagrante delicto. Reyhan is sent back to the village where she later discovers that she is pregnant with the doctor's child (Did I say that the movie requires a little bit of suspension of disbelief?). When she has labour pains, she runs into the forest and has her baby all by herself! She then goes to town and leaves the baby on the doctor's doorstep hoping that he'll take care of it. A while later, in the hope that she can probably take care of all the children of the doctor's household, she goes back. The doctor's wife gets suspicious and Reyhan is asked to return to her village along with her infant son. Back in the village, she marries Veysel. However, she finds it hard to respect or love him, even though she is not above taking advantage of his inebriated condition!

Nurhan is the quintessential middle child. She is desperate for attention and affection. She replaces Reyhan in the doctor's household after Reyhan is sent back to the village. She loves the children but is resentful of the bedwetting habits of one of her charges. She figures that if she catches a cold, she would not be asked to wash the soiled sheets and perhaps her foster parents would take measures to stop their son's bedwetting behaviour. However, she is horrified to find that her foster parents still expect her to wash the soiled sheets even though she is ill. She gets rebellious, tries to discipline the bedwetter and is soon kicked out of her foster house.

Havva, the youngest daughter, is the most naive character in the story. She lost her position in her foster home because her charge died. Back in her village home, the home of her birth, she feels like a stranger. The house seems new to her. She misses her foster mother and the deceased baby. She even dreams of giving birth to a baby who resembles her beloved charge, prompting her return to the foster home! Her father is trying to place her in the doctor's home provoking Nurhan's jealousy. She learns of her eldest sister, Reyhan's past and is deeply disappointed. Then, she sees the sick Nurhan suffer while the doctor, her foster parent doesn't even bother to pay her a visit.

Veysel is Reyhan's husband. He loves her even though he knows that she only married him for the sake of her child. He wants to make a good life for his little family but being illiterate, uncultured and jobless, he finds himself at a great disadvantage. To make matters worse, the village has a dying economy; the coal mines are collapsing and the young people find themselves with no job opportunities. Veysel hates tending his father-in-law's sheep, but being penniless and untrained, he doesn't have much choice. He is tired and frustrated of being considered a bumbling idiot. He asks the doctor to get him a job in the city but his jealousy gets the better of him. At this point, you pity him and feel that he is his own worst enemy. Soon enough, in a fit of terrible rage, he accidentally ends up killing his foster son! On a run from the police, he finds himself in the company of bandits, the very people that he is afraid of during the beginning of the movie. However, the harsh frost-ridden winters and bad company prove to be his undoing. He seeks absolution for his sins from Reyhan but the bereaved mother is too angry to be forgiving. She even tells him that she is pregnant with his child but would go to Ankara & get it aborted. Guilty, desperate and heart broken, he hangs himself.

This movie has a plot that reminded me of a Greek tragedy. The characters are all trying to break a vicious circle, but their circumstances get the better of their intentions. The father finds himself in a vicious circle of offering one after the other of his daughters to the doctor's household, even though it always ends badly. Reyhan makes mistakes after mistakes, ultimately hurting herself, her offspring and all the rest of the family in the process. Nurhan pays for her bad decisions with her health and possibly her life. Veysel's misfortune and temper bring a lot of suffering all around and eventually his life falls into a downward spiral.

Overall, a good movie with perfect acting, cinematography and direction. Unfortunately, it has an uneven storyline.

P. S. This reviewer couldn't help but notice that the only happy person in this story was the crazy lady who enjoyed half somersaults on the floor!

What an absolute gem from Uruguay! I love Aki Kaurismaki's films for their unique take on the mundane affairs of everyday life even though they are somewhat slow & tragic. This tragicomedy is somewhat perkier but only marginally so. At a superficial level, there isn't a whole lot going on in the movie, but when the viewer sticks with it for a little while, the humor & pathos surfaces with such subtlety that it's a sheer delight to watch.

The plot revolves around a middle aged man, Jacobo's long forgotten brother, Herman arriving for the ceremonial raising of their mother's tombstone. The man asks his secretary, Marta to act as his wife for the duration of his brother's visit. After the ceremony and upon Herman's suggestion, they all visit Piriapolis, a resort town, that the brothers used to visit with their family when they were little boys.

Jacobo is a middle aged man who owns a run down sock factory which employs 3 women, one of whom is Marta. He has been a dutiful son who took care of his mother during her prolonged illness. He also took over factory that he inherited from his father. All this while his younger brother, Herman (which literally means brother) relocated to Brazil, got married and raised his daughters there who barely speak any Spanish now; so cut off are they from their inheritance, cultural or otherwise. The brothers have very different personalities. Jacobo, the dutiful older brother has become a recluse who is indifferent to the feelings of those around him. He is a decent guy but the tedium of his life has turned him into a sourpuss. He is so stuck in his ways that he has become inflexible, with no chance for growth, professional or personal. Herman, on the other hand, is friendly and affectionate. He done very well for himself in the foreign land. In order to assuage his guilt for not helping his brother out with caring for their mother or the factory, he offers him a hefty sum of money and even offers to collaborate with him so as to modernize the factory.

Marta is oldest of the three women employed in Jacobo's factory. She is also the overseer and serves as Jacobo's secretary. She is deferential, meek & easy to get along with. She is lonely & seems to have accepted the rut that is her life without any complaints probably because that is the only life she has ever known. She even listens to the same kind of music on her music player, avoiding the modern music being played on the radio. When Jacobo asks her to pose as his wife for his brother's visit, she accepts quickly, turning his bachelor pad into a cozy little home, replete with a woman's touch. She is pleased at the prospect of playing Jacobo's wife, refuses any compensation for the same and even undergoes a bit of a makeover to play the part right. However, our dour hero doesn't so much as take any notice or even acknowledge the great effort that she puts in for his sake. He even separates the twin beds in the bedroom that Marta must have dragged together after taking considerable pains.

As important as the brothers are to the story, this film is really about Marta's awakening as a woman. In the beginning, we see that she has some feelings for the distant Jacobo, but he keeps rejecting her on various occasions. However, Marta seems to be happy to be able to be a part of a family, even for a little while and therefore, agrees to go to Piriapolis, much to Jacobo's chagrin. Once at the resort, she gets closer to Herman, who is very friendly & flirtatious. Marta, who has been starved for affection her whole life, sees the charm but not the fact that Herman has never been a very reliable guy. All this while, Jacobo seems to be his cheerless old self, who refuses to throw even an ounce of affection Marta's way, even though he clearly likes her & is jealous of her growing proximity with his brother. At this point, along with Marta, even the viewer gets frustrated with Jacobo. We see how such an unhappy & dull person can never make anyone a good life partner. The meek Marta finally decides to write a note for Herman & tells him to read it only after he boards the plane. We never know what's in the note, but we can guess.

Upon his return, Jacobo, pays Marta handsomely with the money that Herman gave him plus most of the money that he won at the roulette table (he is a decent man after all!). However, the monetary compensation is just not enough for Marta. Heartbroken, she leaves for her home and does not return to the factory the next morning as she always did in the past. Her absence is striking to the viewer when contrasted with the daily routine inside the factory. When Marta's younger colleagues ask Jacobo if they can play music, he refuses but then tells them to ask Marta when she returns. Perhaps, Jacobo knows that the smitten Marta will pursue his fickle brother for a while, but in the event of his desertion, will find her way back to the good old sock factory. Who knows, such events may have happened earlier too during their youth. That could explain Jacobo's resentment towards Marta & Herman's flirtation! Or as an alternative ending, perhaps Marta will now carve out a better life for herself, having been given a glimpse into life's riches!

This beautiful little film is set in Croatia but the issues raised have a global appeal. It serves as a moral parable to demonstrate that if we wish to make a world where everybody is equal, then we need to get rid of all kinds of prejudice; be it class-based, race-based or sexual-orientation based.

Vjeko Kralj is a high school professor living in an apartment complex in Zagreb. He is forced to live a secret life on account of being gay and transvestite. His father, Hrvoje Kralj is a Croat war veteran who is an invalid having had both his legs amputated while serving his country. Both the father & son are staunch nationalists. The father-son duo have a love-hate relationship since the father is a homophobe and has always treated his gay son poorly. Having lost the man who was the love of his life, Vjeko is only surviving out of duty & love for his father, even though he resents his father & sometimes finds it hard to carry on caring about his cruel father. Outside of his home also, Vjeko has a hard life. He is victimized by some homophobic individuals who beat him up mercilessly one night. But, as much as we sympathize with Vjeko, we soon see that he is not perfect either. He is a recluse who does not mingle with his neighbors. He is prejudiced against all Serbs, so much so that he would stop enjoying a great meal, should he hear midway that it is a delicacy from Serbia.

Maja Samardzic is the heart of this story. She is a nurse who lives in the same building complex as Vjeko. She is a Croat who fell in love with her cop husband, Ante Samardzic who is a Serb. Maja is a kind-hearted & compassionate woman who sees the good in everyone. She recognizes the battered & bruised Vjeko as he is brought into the hospital where she works. Once he is released from the hospital, she offers to help Vjeko with his bandaging & also with his father. Vjeko is grateful and offers to pay her, but she flat out refuses saying that where she comes from, people help their neighbors. Slowly, Vjeko starts warming up to her & once while having tea, asks her why she chose to marry a Serb when being a beautiful woman, she could've had her pick of men. She puts him in place by replying that she fell in love & that love sees no prejudice. She then asks Vjeko to give lessons in Croatian constitution to her husband Ante, who needs to know it by heart from his upcoming promotion exam. Vjeko agrees but his dislike of Serbs gets in the way. He is rude to Ante who returns insolence with insolence. Slowly, Maja makes them both see that a little bit of empathy goes a long way. Eventually, these strangers give Vjeko a new reason to live!

This movie depicts the apocalypse as it would have happened about 150-200 years back in the Hungarian plains. The horseman and his mare are presumably from the famous Nietzsche episode. Nietzsche saw the rough treatment of the animal & felt that it had to be the end of the world when man has to be so brutal to an animal. Apparently, Tarr ran with this idea & this movie is the result of that long run. It has been said that principles are the luxury that can be afforded only by the rich of the society. The oppressed folks can barely afford to eat 2 meals a day and therefore cannot afford to have principles. Through this movie, Tarr is possibly trying to show the horseman's life and point of view, not that the poor guy was shown to have any, struggling as he was with his daily existence. The horseman and his daughter are dirt-poor & their sole source of income is the mare. Perhaps this sense of impending doom forced the horseman to be brutal to the animal. Tarr also tried to do justice by Nietzsche and put before us a scenario wherein the end of the world as feared by Nietzsche was really nigh. The horseman's poor treatment of the animal could be seen to have stemmed from his own mistreatment by the society. The horseman and his daughter are shown to be some of the last surviving members of a world which is quickly spiraling towards doom, all in a timespan of 6 days! So, according to Tarr, the world ends just the way it began, at least according to the Christian version of origin of life. As with any natural calamity, the animal senses the doom before the humans do. Over the 6 days, the mare stops moving, then eating and finally drinking water too. The humans keep up their struggle for a bit longer. When their well dries up, they try to look for an alternative place to live, but they return soon, perhaps because as their neighbour had told them, the rest of the city has long been abandoned & is more uninhabitable than their present home. However, soon after their return, the sunlight goes away, followed by their lamps and finally the embers in their stove/heater combo. Forced to eat raw potatoes now, the daughter gives in to despair and her father follows soon after. For Tarr, the world really does end with a whimper!

The scene with Alyosha crying was so devastatingly cruel and yet so timely and appropriate, that for me, it made the whole movie worth watching. It's just a flash of a scene, but I would be hard pressed to find any other scene in any other movie that was so brief & yet so powerful. It ruthlessly makes a point: we can knowingly or unknowingly inflict untold pain and suffering on another human being!

The film has a universal appeal. It very beautifully depicts how our extreme hedonism and self-absorption is creating a state of apathy and lovelessness. And like a contagion, this lovelessness is percolating every aspect of our lives. What's more is that when we feel loveless and unhappy, we may put the blame on other people's shoulders. However, the fact remains that the root cause of the lovelessness and unhappiness is internal and unless that is taken care of, no new relationship is going to make us happy. That is exactly what happened with both Boris and Zhenya. At the end, even though they were in new relationships, they were still disengaged from their new partners and in Boris's case, even his younger son! The director has hit the nail on the head with this one. His message is loud and clear. I hope, we as a society, will soon find our way out of this state of apathy & lovelessness.

A masterpiece in every way!

This is a movie with some world class cinematography and acting. The long beautiful shots are all superbly done. I can even get over the fact that there is no reasonable explanation for the origin of the wall. I can also reconcile myself with the melancholy mood of the film because a cage is a cage, no matter how beautiful. Also, it is abundantly clear (and natural) that the protagonist misses human company. However, what I did not understand is why she never tried to assess the limits of the wall, even though she was very unhappy being trapped within it. This is especially relevant when she came across another person, a stranger, within the confines of the wall. While so far she had only glimpsed at humans who were outside the wall & were almost inanimate, here was another living breathing human being inside the constraints of the wall! What I do not understand is why she never wondered how this stranger entered the area. Maybe there were cracks or gaps in the so-called wall? Because if there was a way that this stranger could have entered, there must also have been a way that our protagonist could have escaped the area. Just saying!

This is a film about all the invisible things that we usually don't see when we look at people & analyze them. There are 4 principal characters. But Rose & George are dull & very ordinary. So effectively, this movie is about Phil & Peter.

At the beginning, Phil's toxic masculinity is off-putting. He is mean & vicious to the people around him. Then surprisingly, his attitude towards Peter softens. We also see how he pines for his lost love. But his days are numbered because ironically, the strong & invincible Phil succumbs to a seemingly tiny pathogen.

On the other hand, Peter seems docile & innocent. He's studying to be a doctor & therefore, appears to be kind-hearted. But this presumed victim has a mean streak in him. Slowly, he turns tables on Phil; & he is quite cold-hearted about it. The morality of his actions is debatable, but who are we to judge a kid who has already lost a parent & is bound to lose another one if he doesn't do anything about it? The book presumably had more of an explanation for Peter's actions. However, I must congratulate Ms. Campion for deliberately omitting that part because this has enabled her to present us with a delicious moral dilemma with the potential to keep philosophers & psychologists awake for many nights after watching the film!

Cinematography and acting are top notch too. The view of the hills & Mr. Cumberbatch's acting are both most impressive.

While not perfect, this movie sure has its moments. It is a great satire about the class divide. It is about how, despite so much cultural evolution, we still tend to be stereotypes. The movie provides stunning insights into what it is like to be on either side of the class divide, though the narrative is skewed towards the elite because our protagonist, Christian, the chief curator of a posh museum, belongs to that class. Some scenes resonated deeply with me:

• The interview scene with Anne, the American journalist where she asks Christian to explain the art descriptions posted on the museum's website. The scene is hilarious because it becomes very clear how nonsensical the descriptions really are!

• The scene with the woman running away from a man who is trying to kill her. Christian feels a rush of having done something good & even connects with the stranger after telling him that it was clever of the stranger to involve Christian! The scene is quite effective. It pulled me in and made me feel Christian's joy!

• Afterwards, when Christian realizes that his wallet has been stolen, I felt his anguish too! I did not particularly like how he chose to resolve the issue. The weird behaviour of his subordinate who after coaxing Christian towards a path of revenge, backs out at the last minute, is a reminder that we must fight our own battles. Also, I wasn't too thrilled at the way that Christian still manages to involve this subordinate later on.

-The scene at Anne's place, with the Chimp and the dust bin is quite weird! The dust bin scene, in particular, depicts the paranoia of both the characters very well.

-The scene with Anne at the museum besides the chair exhibit is quite hilarious too! She knows that Christian does not trust her and that he's not interested in her. But, she still demands a relationship because she just can't deal with the fact that seduced by the man's power & charisma, she had a meaningless one night stand with him!

-The scene where the beggar helps Christian by looking after his stuff is quite powerful in its depiction of how help can sometimes come from unexpected quarters and how the poor may be more humane than the rich!

-The scene with the beast act was a very good satire on the human condition since the first man who decided to help the woman being assaulted turned out to be an old man instead of all the young bucks sitting in the hall. And thereafter, it seems that everybody joined the bandwagon and overpowered the miscreant.

• The scene with Christian's apology and resignation showed hypocrisy of the world with people condemning him for self-censorship and also for using cheap PR tricks (and what a horrid clip it was!).

Even with so many good scenes, the film is not perfect. In particular, I did not care for the film's treatment of children. I also didn't like how Christian didn't have the courage to do the right thing sometimes.