"Dark Waters" by Todd Haynes (2019)

Where international critics are falling over themselves to praise originality, wit and genius of South Korean cartoonish class divide drama (which I hated passionately), I heard absolutely nobody mention "Dark Waters" which came to my attention thanks to good, old fashioned trailer and its probably not exotic enough for critics to praise - after all, why even bothering with something topic, when we can write essays about brilliance of movie directors from Inner Mongolia and Eastern Islands. Well, I disliked "Parasite" very much and needed something to rekindle my love for cinema, so off I went to see "Dark Waters" in the very same week. Being cynical even to myself, I was prepared that I might like this movie simply because the narrative, style and acting that comes from the West might be closer to my sensibility - no matter how many clichés Hollywood throws at me, at least I can recognise the allusions and appreciate the references. 

To my biggest surprise, it wasn't bad at all - to be honest, the audience was actually spellbound all trough the movie - either the Dutch audience is very polite (which they are) or the movie was genuinely gripping, but there was something about the subject and the acting that crossed over mere entertainment and entered the thought-provoking area, which exactly was the point. After all, the main actor Mark Ruffalo believed in this so much that he took a role as one of the producers behind this project. The subject itself is a mother of all conspiracy theories, them-against-us in this case big moneyed companies against little ordinary man on the street. Ruffalo is a lawyer somehow shoehorned into accepting ungrateful task to fight for a little man, with conglomerate mammoth on the other side. Remember Teflon? Ultra-modern material so irreplaceable in the kitchens? The one that turned out to be actually very harmful and carcenogene? Well, this is a story about how one man (in real life, lawyer Robert Bilott) fought tooth and nail against one of the world's largest corporations DuPont who had power, finances and prestige to sweep this unfortunate fact under the rug for decades. Make no mistake, people in DuPont knew that this is very harmful material (something called PFOA and maddeningly difficult to find, until Ruffalo discovers its chemical substance initially used as colour for tanks) - without going on too much into the plot, I can only say that the audience was deadly silent and focused all the way trough and we all left the cinema wondering what other chemicals we encounter on daily basis and is it actually possible at all to avoid the contamination? Of course, the movie stays with you for days and I found myself checking the facts on the internet long after I have seen the movie - it is thought provoking in the best sense, because its something that I couldn't shake off and just right now discovered that PFOA can still be found in microwave Popcorn for example. Than again, everything from the air that we breath to the water we drink is probably contaminated one way or the other, unless one lives in some far away mountains completely cut out from civilisation so tumours and cancers are our destiny until science finds out more about it. My feeling about the future of this planet and human race is very bleak and I am almost sure it will be all polluted, industrialised and future generations will fight wars over clean water and fresh air. 

"Parasite" by Bong Joon-ho (2019)

This South Korean movie was so highly praised everywhere that I got really curious - even more so, when initially I couldn't even get the tickets - the avalanche of international awards and six Oscar nominations convinced me even more that this is something I should definitely not miss. While browsing the reviews, I was very careful to read just opinions but absolutely nothing about the plot, because I wanted to enter the cinema like Tabula Rasa and enjoy it without any previous knowledge. Now, I must admit that Asian cinema is for the most part another planet for me - besides giant Akira Kurosawa and completely random but unforgettable black & white "Kuroneko" (1968) I hardly remember seeing anything that I truly enjoyed, partly because in this part of the world this work is less promoted than for example US or European cinematography. Yes, there was occasional Bruce Lee or Japanese horror but if you ask me, I would say "Rashomon" and Japanese horror "Ring" (which was chilling, must admit) - still have to see classic "Tokyo Story". So I went to cinema excited, curious and ready to be blown away - after all, it was a hit on Cannes Film Festival and reviews always insist its on top of "The Best of 2019" lists. Coming from non-English speaking territory, I am all for international cinema and very supportive of various voices from all over the world - in fact, celebrated Mexican "Roma" is still one of my all-time favourites and I genuinely think its one of the best things I have ever seen, right next to famous classics. 

Imagine my surprise when immediately I was struck with cartoonish vibe - just like Japanese "Tampopo" (1985) that I saw on insistence of a friend and which turned out to be grotesque over-acting, unfunny and bizarre, actors in this South Korean movie were all bent on making faces, screaming and lifting their eyebrows in the most kabuki-like way (good guys are smiling, bad guys are wearing a moustache). From there it was all downhill for me - so much that I even asked myself is something wrong with me, am I perhaps in a bad mood or preoccupied with my own life so I can't focus on the screen but no if I really enjoy the movie (like I did with "Roma") I have no time to analyse and wonder, if something moves me than I am swept away with the power of it. Unfortunately, the most charitable comment in this case would be - I chuckled occasionally, but for the most part of it I was annoyed. And the only explanation for this is that perhaps I am not used to Asian cinema where the concept of realistic acting seems to be completely alien phenomenon and every message has to be drilled in the viewer's brain without any subtlety. Between all this screaming, shouting and exaggeration there as a story about the class divide, cunning ordinary men (from the gutter) infiltrating wealthy household and taking their revenge but for the life of me I can't say that i enjoyed it, in fact I even started to look at my watch to check when is this darn thing going to finish eventually. What started as dark comedy turns slowly into somber and gloomy drama so I left the cinema not enthralled or happy or excited as with "Roma" but exhausted and worrying what's wrong with me, disliking film that everybody praises. 

A few thoughts:

They say that cinema is international language but perhaps Asian cinema is still too distant for me - making faces, screaming, shouting and gobbling noodles all the time is not something I had encounter in a real life. I travelled trough Far East and people I had encountered were mostly very polite & reserved so this cinematic exaggeration is obviously not realistic but designed as a parody. 

The idea of "good poor" and "stupid rich" is way too simplistic for me to accept. Yeah, I know, its a comedy but still, the poor family was just nasty and lazy, in fact makes you wonder who is Parasite from the title - living in their squalor, they couldn't even fold the pizza boxes properly to earn at least some money (but the director is quick to point how smart and witty they are) and for the rest of the movie they are secretly stealing from their wealthy employers, portrayed as stupid and gullible. Well, no - I find the poor family nasty, greedy and disliked them immensely. Couldn't side with them as anti-heroes. 

The movie goes more than two hours and its draining. At some points its at least amusing and I chuckled here and there, but last half an hour I honestly couldn't wait to get out of there. It really presents a problem for me because I don't like to feel like a prisoner in the cinema and I had the same thing with latest Tarantino. My impression is that critics and reviews are jumping on a bandwagon and praising something exotic because its a thing to do - hey, lets praise the latest movie from Timbuktu and show our superiority by comparing director Choo Choo to director Oompa Oompa and Hee Haw. True, Parasite" is very dense & full of ideas & obviously multi-layered and carefully planned but it left me completely unmoved and curiously distant - in fact, I was actually relieved to finally leave the cinema. Too cartoonish for my taste. 

Hermitage again

I have probably mention this before, but Amsterdam has a Hermitage as well - it is a satellite from the big mama in St. Petersburg and its situated in a awesome, imposing building right in the heart of the city - for centuries this building was old people's home until the institution moved elsewhere and the city gave the spot to local version of Russian collection - the exhibitions change every six months or so and I always try to check them out - I have also visited the real thing in St. Petersburg, which was a bit too crowded for my taste. Not that anybody asks me, but in my opinion Hermitage was just too much - where in New York's Met I loved seeing opulence, in St. Petersburg it just struck me as vulgar and showy - at one point I just had enough and galloped trough the rest of the palace to see darn Caravaggio - another, quieter museum nearby was less crowded and I enjoyed it much, much more.

Anyway, there is a new exhibition in local Hermitage and off I went to check it out. The current exhibition is called "Jewels! The Glitter of the Russian Court" and as usual it attracts enormous audience and commands high prices. Its advertised as profusion of richly decorated gowns and ensembles once worn by the highest echelons at the Russian court. Now, either I have seen too many of these exhibitions or I got saturated with too much knowledge about Russian history but for the first time I looked at this a bit cynically and clear-eyed. This wasn't art. In fact, it wasn't even lesson in history. Looking at the crowd around me - mostly retired Dutch pensioners, silver haired ladies and alike - I saw people admiring and gawking at decorative objects that once belonged to wealthy aristocrats - in other words, current local bourgeoisie soaking in the refined air of Russian court. Bowing to Mammon. Admiring the idea of wealth. Make no mistake, this was not about art or history - dresses, fans and silk shoes that once belonged to countess this or baroness that were not art. If anything, they were stolen from private collections once the real owners were butchered, let's get real. Decorative artifacts displayed in glass cabinets were perhaps pretty but also not art - all sorts of knick-knacks decorated with pearls, rubies and emeralds - exquisitely designed, for sure and great craftsmanship by some of the most famous houses like Cartier and Fabergé but from today's perspective quite ostentatious - jokingly I described the bunch as bottle openers covered in gemstones and basically this is what they were, showy pieces designed to impress the visitors with their owner's wealth, look I can afford to have a comb or toothpick or ashtray decorated with diamonds. Same for jewellery - today we appreciate discreet designs and its all about colour & quality of the stones, not about the size of the rocks. For some reason I didn't really care for this exhibition and mainly it was because it was focused on The Glitter of the Russian Court  - something I have seen many, many times and at this point found it tedious (I mean, are we bowing to royalty here?). No art, no history, just a collection of gold-encrusted salt shakers. Old ladies swooning but me strangely detached. 

One interesting thing were portraits - I mainly just glanced at dresses, feathers, silk shoes and display of peacockokery but the portraits were real deal and some of them actually displayed the owners of these objects. Since I have professional background in gemstones and Russian history, I recognised some of the people on the wall and in fact I do remember seeing the very same portrait of queen mother (previously young princess Dagmar of Denmark, who survived the revolution and died in Denmark) back in Russia. I wanted to explain to my friend who she was and out of me poured the whole story about Romanovs - he was flabbergasted and I was amused that I still possess such encyclopedic knowledge of Romanovs after all this time. There was also a excellent portrait of Italian architect who designed Winter Palace and best of all, a portrait of some young prince (Prince Alexander Mikhailovich Gorchakov) which was sensational and worth admission of the ticket alone, I absolutely loved that portrait and must found out more about its creator. 

Welcome to roaring twenties

And so, here we are in the 1920s (all over again)!

I have skipped the whole month of December - not because my life is boring and there is nothing to write about, but to a contrary, because there was simply too much going on - I have moved the address (again) and in addition to my regular job I also juggle language courses, gym and whatnot - sometimes there are so many things going on that I hardly have time to reflect, however I did came back to my regular old-fashioned diary so that is a welcome return to tradition and I am very pleased with it, because it is a helpful and very therapeutic habit. I was planning to write about things even back in December - movies, music etc. - but got distracted so here we are, new year & new beginning. On the last day of 2019 I noted how everything that I wanted eventually comes true but it just takes some time and patience, basically it was a very good year for me except that I still haven't completely fix the housing issue but oh well, it will happen when it has to happen. 

And now onwards with the latest movie or should I say the first movie of 2020:

"1917" by Sam Mendes

Under normal circumstances I would never go to cinema to watch war movie, since I was in war myself and don't find it thrilling or entertaining - however, at this point I am distanced from that experience enough to sit back and enjoy the fictional movie without being traumatised. The reviews were excellent, trailer looked great and I was ready to visit cinema, so off I went with a friend in tow (who, as usual, was innocent victim and had no idea where I am taking him). It turned out very solid movie - I would even say gripping - about WW1 and all those fresh-faced boys in trenches. Both Dean-Charles Chapman and Richard Madden come from "Game of Thrones" universe so that was fun to see two worlds colliding, but there were also other famous actors involved like Colin Firth, Benedict Cumberbatch and Mark Strong. (No ladies in sight, as this is a frontline war movie and when one comes along, she is more a symbol than real character) The story actually happened and it was told to a director by his grandfather who lived trough this: he was sent across the fields to warn the Battalion of the Devonshire Regiment not to attack retreating Germans because that was a trap set to annihilate them. In real life it was director's grandfather Alfred Mendes but in the movie the story is divided between two boys (Tom Blake and Will Schofield) who got a unenviable task to go across the deserted and utterly destroyed area (no man's land) to warn fellow soldiers about potential danger. It looks and feels very much like Odyssey because boys go from one adventure to another + technically it is a feat of cinematography to present everything in a smooth, never-ending continuous shot. It has been done before but its still a interesting idea and I must say the audience was spellbound to the very end. Perhaps the middle part of the movie slows down a bit but on the other hand it is a welcome rest between two major chapters - and even this middle part looks fantastic, with town in ruins lightened only by hand flares. As expected, I cried my eyes out and left the cinema feeling completely cathartic - it was a great movie and definitely one to watch in the cinema because it would be a pity to see it at home, it really deserves big screen.