Kanał (1957)

But we will be hailed by the future generations

On the 1^st of September, 1939 the Nazi Germany attacked Poland. Despite the heroic resistance, Poland was overrun. The occupation of Poland meant five years of pain and suffering for the Poles. By the end of 1944, the Nazis were beaten on all fronts and at the same time the Warsaw Uprising took place.

In 1957, Andrzej Wajda got a chance to picture the Warsaw Uprising and he took his chance. The film starts on the last days of the Uprising – the 25^th of September, 1944. Lieutenant Zadra leads a unit of the Home Army, who are trying to escape Warsaw through the sewers.

There are lots of stereotypes about the Poles – that they are slow, that they are don’t love anyone, that they cannot unite, that they are only good as a source of cheap labor. In 1938, Poland annexes Zaolzie and was branded the European Jackal.

In the next year, Poland paid the price, but the war showed the heroic side of the Poles. Andrzej Wajda started the film on purpose at the end of Uprising, when the Home Army was almost wiped out and the remaining soldiers are trying to escape Warsaw.

Andrzej Wajda gives unique traits to all characters, among them there are romantics, cynics, clever, silly, honest and liars, but all of them have one aim – to show their bravery to the world and enemy. The sewers give the only chance to escape.

Andrzej Wajda portrays the sewers as a metaphor for the death, which will soon come to almost all soldiers in the Uprising. The sewers are a labyrinth, equipped by lots of traps and false exits. But, despite that, the group is trying to escape.

Even in the Hell – labyrinth, the people have not lost the ability to love and be loved. Even war-hardened people could lose the will to live because of the unrequited love or will try to carry a heavily-injured lover to the exit.

The Warsaw Uprising is portrayed as disorganized, unnecessary and politically motivated. But for the soldiers, the Uprising was a chance to show the bravery of the Poles and even the Nazis admitted it. Andrzej Wajda made his film about the soldiers, who won by their bravery the place in the History.

Despite the critics opinion the late films of Andrzej Wajda were not so good (I cannot express my opinion, because I haven’t seen them), but only this film is enough to remember the late Director. And you should not forget, that Andrzej Wajda helped a lot young and talented filmmakers, including my favorite Andrzej Zulawski.

During the Second World War, there were not so heroic nations and there were unexpectedly brave nations. Among the last, there are also the Poles and the Greeks. Let’s forget politics and remember the bravery of the Poles.

I recommend to watch it along with Pokolenie and Popiól i diament.

Psy (1992)

Za chleb i wolność, i nową Polskę Janek Wiśniewski padł

About two months ago, I have written a joint review on «Man of Marble» and «Man of Iron» and richteur gave some valuable insights in his commentaries. After that, I have decided to read his blog and I was impressed by his review of Psy. Because of that, I have decided to watch this example of the Polish cinema of the 1990s.

Former officers of the SB (Polish secret police), including Franciszek Maurer (Franz), are trying to become police officers in the post-socialistic Poland. They are destroying incriminating evidence, they are reevaluated by the Special Comission. Some, including Franz, are lucky and they join the Criminal Police; some are not so lucky and they join the criminals.

The last verse of the famous poem Ballada o Janku Wiśniewskim (by Krzysztof Dowgiałło) includes such verse: « Za chleb i wolność, i nową Polskę Janek Wiśniewski padł».In 1989, Poland was new, the Poles got the freedom (or at least the illusion of freedom), but the bread became scarce. In the same time, the Polish directors got the chance to shoot film on the forbidden themes.

The Director portrayed the birth of new Poland and he had chosen the most despicable characters – ex-SB officers. The former elite are thrown into the Criminal Police, where they are treated as third-class people. Despite that, the history teaches us that most of the times soldiers are punished, but they masters are spared. The masters are spared because they are able to destroy documents or cut a deal with new masters.

The Director depicts ex-SB officers as ordinary people. Among them there are good and bad, brave and weak. Most of them, along with the Poles, are trying to make ends meet, but the former government taught them the only thing – to kill. The new Poland declares that they don’t need the professional killers, but the other side is ready to employ their talents.

«Psy» shows the general disappointment in the new ruling class. The film shows the beginning of corruption, the morphing of politicians and criminals. When Franz begins to harass seriously criminals, he is quickly dismissed from the police because of his past.

The new Poland is not suited for «Man of Marble» or «Man of Iron», the new Poland suited for unscrupulous murderers and thieves. And in 1989, Ballada o Janku Wiśniewskim is sang by the drunken ex-SB officers, because nobody cares about the fallen heroes.

The Polish cinema have again pleasantly surprised me. Władysław Pasikowski took the form of the American action film and included a very fresh and clever drama. The Russians would also understand this film.

I highly recommend it, it is better than  most of the so-called «Russian noir» of the 1990s.

Aftermath (2017)

I would like for someone to say that they're sorry for killing my family

A long time ago, I have read in an encyclopedia the following passage: «No, not every file is better than death». As I grew older, I have encountered in cinema and literature the numerous examples of this phrase. This film also prover the truthfulness of this phrase.

Roman Melnik is an ordinary man, who lost his wife and child in a plane crash. The tragedy happened while air traffic controller Jake Bonanos was on duty. The air traffic controller confessed his guilt and it still haunts him. Despite that, Roman is not satisfied by formal complaints…

A lot of people like to talk about quick and painless death. If you judge by this standards, the plane crash is not so bad. Nevertheless, the quick death does not tone down the grief of relatives and other close people.

The stereotypical killer is not a monster. In reality, the most murderers are merely ordinary people. The ordinary people are mostly presented in negligent cases. Jake Bonanos is just one of those normal and ordinary men.

The modern society got so used to death and violence, so almost every death, with a few exceptions, is ignored by the society. Even such «untypical» death as a plane crash brings out only formal apology in a form of cash payment and VIP flyer status.

Most of the people have encountered the extreme psychic pressure. The heroes encountered even worse fate – spiritual death. Roman and Jake are just merely the bodies, who lost all will to live. They are trying to regain the will to live and continue to live, but will they succeed?

Cinema and literature created an illusion that revenge is a mean to regain spiritual well-being. One of the actors, who got his part in popularization of this stereotype, is Arnold Schwarzenegger. But reality is far apart from fiction – revenge will not bring back the loved ones and, in most cases, will not regain you spiritual well-being. In «Aftermath», Arnold Schwarzenegger is not a superhero, he is an ordinary man, who is sentenced to a life sentence in his internal psychological prison.

«Aftermath» is a film about ordinary people, who are trying to live on. The film does not show the heroes or bravado, but everyone could meet or become Roman or Jake.

Watch this film, maybe it will produce a genuine emotional response.

The Entertainer (1960)

Why should I care?

An interesting episode was depicted in the second part of Andrew Marr's History of Modern Britain. In the mid-1950s, a young playwright John Osborne wrote «Look Back in Anger». The play was very successful, but Lawrence Olivier was not too impressed. Afterwards, Arthur Miller visited London and asked Olivier to accompany him to the theater.

After the play, Arthur Miller and Lawrence Olivier went backstage to meet a young playwright. There, astonished Miller saw how Olivier begged Osborne to write something for him. The Great Baron Lawrence Olivier begging some boy! Nonsense! Nevertheless, «The Entertainer» stepped out on the London stage and the shortly thereafter, the film was made.

Great Britain finished the Second World War as a formal winner, but lost its imperial power. Before the 8^th of May, 1945 there was the British Empire, but after that there was only Great Britain. For a while, the British ruling class tried to behave like Empire, but the Suez Crisis destroyed all illusions.

«The Entertainer» starts in the first days of the Suez Crisis, The author shows a grey and tired Britain, whose habitants has lost the faith in a future of their country. The more successful are dreaming of immigration, the less successful are trying to speculate on the remains of the Imperial Glory. The film is set in some crisis-struck coastal British town.

«The Entertainer» shows not-so-good adventures of Archie Rice – a fifty-year old music hall artist, who has been avoiding the income tax man for twenty years. Son of a music hall legend, Archie presents a primitive show, which quickly loses its popularity. One day he got the chance – he seduced a young girl, whose wealthy parents are ready to bankroll his new show…

As I have written before, the author portrayed Britain in decline. That is why, the decay of music hall is one of the main themes. Music hall was one of the characteristics of the Edwardian Era – the peak of British glory and power. In the mid-1950s, music hall, along with Britain, was in decline.

Whatever you tell about Margaret Thatcher reforms, her reelection in 1983 was guaranteed by victory in the Falklands War, which gave back the imperial pride to the British. The Suez Crisis also began on a high note. Archie Rice Show is again popular, his father got an invitation for comeback, son of Archie – sergeant in the British Army, - will be soon home.

Despite all of the bravado, in 2017 we know the final of the Suez Crisis. In the first time for many centuries, Britain was subdued by another Empire. The fall would affect every hero of the film. The post-Suez Britain became a satellite of the US. The new values dominated everything, including music hall.

Truly, why should I care, it I lost already.

Watch this films, maybe it will make you think.

Primary (1960)

Everyone is voting for Jack

During the 1950s, the President of the United States was General Dwight Eisenhower. The Twenty-second Amendment to the United States Constitution was ratified in 1951. This amendment has set out a term limit for election and overall time of service to the office of President of the United States (eight years, whether consecutive or not).

In 1960, the Republican presumptive presidential nominee was quickly established – Vice President Richard Nixon. On the other hand, the Democrats didn’t have a strong candidate. The Democratic primaries got such candidates as Minnesota senator Hubert Humphrey, ex-Illinois governor Adlai Stephenson, Senate Majority Leader Lyndon Johnson and young Massachusetts senator John Kennedy.

This film depicts the 1960 Wisconsin primary election between John F. Kennedy and Hubert Humphrey. In 2016, we remember John Kennedy as a young and charismatic President, but we don’t take into the account the prejudices of the 1950s America. We cannot understand how America could doubt the candidacy of John Kennedy. But in 1960, John Kennedy was a candidate with lots of flaws. John Kennedy was Irish and Catholic and those groups were ostracized by WASPs as second class citizens and by protestant clergies as not so loyal to the Constitution as to the papal decrees.

All of the pundits thought that the 1960 Wisconsin primary election is closed behind Hubert Humphrey. Wisconsin shared the same border with Minnesota, Hubert Humphrey was a reputed force in the Senate and a lot of local figures have endorsed the Minnesotan. Hubert Humphrey was also the civil rights champion and active proponent of farming subsidies.

In comparison to Hubert Humphrey, John Kennedy got a reputation as a playboy and rich kid, whose daddy has bought him a place in the Congress. Also John Kennedy has missed a lot of the legislative sessions and was not too active in the bill drafting business. Along with above mentioned Catholicism, John Kennedy was criticized for inactivity during the censure hearing of Joseph McCarthy.

As always, the experts forgot something important. This time they forgot that during the campaign, the political views are not so important. Kentucky’s senator Mitch McConnell said that «issues, unfortunately, usually are kind of peripheral to winning a campaign». The same senator said to the students what built a political party. He’d written on the blackboard three words: «Money, money, money»[1].

According with the McConnell words, the form takes precedence over the substance (most of the times). Hubert Humphrey comes to a farming community, visits the high school and talks about the farm subsidies legislation (which he had cosponsored). John Kennedy visits the grand ballroom of some fancy hotel and after the fanfares talks about some bill (probably nonexistent), which deals with the export of wheat to the socialistic countries.

The film also illustrates the birth of TV as a crucial tool for the campaigning. The fourth book of Robert Caro’s anthology on LBJ has a special chapter on JFK called «The Rich Man’s Son». This chapter also points out the tactics of JFK. Very early, John Kennedy understood that the Senate is not the best starting ground for the presidential campaign. This assumption was based on a fact, that every Aey or Nay for any bill would make new political opponents.

Instead of legislating, John Kennedy starts building his media image. The 1950s America is charmed by young senator, everybody talks about his beautiful wife, John Kennedy becomes a popular guest on famous TV shows. The electorate of Wisconsin also charmed by the TV image of John Kennedy; Hubert Humphrey’s real struggle on their behalf leave them cold.

The 1960 Wisconsin primary election as the 2016 general election campaign shows a clash between different styles of political campaign. Of course, compared with Trump, JFK was a progressive visionary. Nevertheless, a time bomb, which allowed Trump’s victory was armed in 1960.

If you miss the civilized political campaigning process, then watch this film. After watching, I recommend you to read «The Years of Lyndon Johnson» (Robert A. Caro).

---

[1] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/11/mitch-mcconnell-profile_n_3550173.html

Man of Marble, Man of Iron (1976, 1981)

The new Poland is born here

If Andrzej Wajda was born in the USSR, his fate would not be so good. I think that, if Andrzej Wajda was a Soviet film director, his films would be banned by the Soviet authorities until the 1980s. Andrzej Wajda was always interested in the history of his homeland, and his vision almost always was not too ideologically correct.

Even in 1958, in Ashes and Diamonds Andrzej Wajda showed a Home Army soldier Maciek as a positive hero. In 1976, Andrzej Wajda showed it’s past to the forgetful Polish audience and authorities. Finally, in 1981, Andrzej Wajda showed the birth of post-socialistic world. I think that it would be suitable to analyze «Man of Marble» and «Man of Iron» together.

«Man of Marble» depicts the relatively free Poland of the 1970s. A young cinema school graduate Agnieszka chooses an unusual subject for her graduation project – a documentary film about a bricklayer Mateusz Birkut, who was once a hero. The film school authorities are rather skeptical, but anyway they give the green light to Agnieszka. Agnieszka starts her research, but this proves to be a tough task, because Mateusz Birkut is almost completely cut from the history.

As I have written before, «Man of Marble» was shot in 1976. Back then, the official history portrayed the 1950s repressions as a result of actions of the authorities and certain apparatchiks. Besides that, that period of history was officially forgotten. Of course, a lot of repressed people were freed. But no one couldn’t bring back to them the health and heal the soul pain.

While Agnieszka researches the material, she dugs deeper and deeper in the Polish history of the 1940-1950s. During the first postwar years, Mateusz Birkut is just one of the illiterate young workers, who were sent to the great building sites of the new Poland.

When an ambitious young film director and authorities decided to make Mateusz a hero for their own advancement, the life of Mateusz Birkut suddenly changes. Mateusz Birkut becomes a hero, his portrait hangs with other record-breaking workers, he is received by the highest authorities and he marries a beautiful young athlete.

Mateusz Birkut symbolizes the working class of Poland – hardworking and honest people, who are willing to work hard for their homeland. Despite the declaration that the power was passed to the working class; in reality the power was passed from the bourgeois exploiters to the apparatchiks. As bourgeois, apparatchiks view Mateusz Birkut and others as merely an instrument to advance their goals.

Mateusz Birkut sincerely believes in a new ideology and is willing to help his comrades. When he tries to help his arrested friend and cross the path with apparatchiks his fate suddenly changes. Mateusz Birkut is arrested and declared an enemy of state. In the mid-1950s, he is released and rehabilitated. Mateusz Birkut is drawn back in the politics as a symbol of post-totalitarian Poland, but he just merely wants to gain back his life. It is impossible, because Mateusz’s wife has left him and he is cut out from the history.

Agnieszka was brought up in a different Poland (quoting Jean-Luc Godard: «The Children of Marx and Coca-Cola»), but she encounters the prevailing double think. Even the coworkers of Mateusz Birkut have cut out the memory about him. And when Agnieszka almost touches the truth about Mateusz Birkut, the state intervenes – the film is cancelled and Agnieszka is dismissed on the spot.

In «Man of Iron» Andrzej Wajda depicts the events of 1980 – the famous Gdańsk Shipyard strike. Almost everyone thinks that the strike is doomed for a bloody reprisal as previous strikes. Editor Winkel is ordered by the deputy chairman of Radio Committee to achieve coverage compromising the activists…

The activists of the Red May (Paris 1968) were described by the communists as a petit bourgeoisie, who would drop their radical thinking, when it would be their turn to run a family firm and exploit the workers. But in 1980, in Poland, the workers were the main string force – the people who had neither the money, neither the protection from the possible ruthless official actions.

Andrzej Wajda makes the son of  Mateusz Birkut -  Maciej Tomczyk as one of the main heroes. As father, Maciej Tomczyk is brave, honest, incorruptible and decisive. Along with real Lech Wałęsa and Anna Walentynowicz, Maciej Tomczyk starts the strike.

If in «Man of Marble» Andrzej Wajda depicts the relatively free Poland of the 1970s, in «Man of Iron» Poland is depicted as a lost and torn country. Tonight Poland is rioting, but tomorrow its streets could be painted with blood. The society is frightened, but it slowly starts transformation. The transformation is not limited to the workers, but touches even the relatively high class – the mass media.

Andrzej Wajda shows though Winkel the transformation of intelligentsia. Winkel is a drunken loser, who has not got anything in common with rioting bydlo. He eagerly starts to write a compromising coverage. But as he starts digging deeper into the roots of the strike, he begins to feel the common with strikers.

The director portrays the ruthless struggle between workers, who got nothing to lose, and elite, who are desperately clinging to their power and privileges. Solidarność has got only two options – to win or die. The government has army and police, the workers has slogans and moral authority.

Another link between «Man of Marble» and «Man of Iron» is Agnieszka. Andrzej Wajda portrays her spiritual transformation – in the first film she is a hysterical film student, who just want to piss off the authorities; the second film shows her as a devoted reformist and loyal wife of Maciej Tomczyk.

There a lot of anecdotes and stories about near-sightedness, cowardice, stupidity and divisions of the Poles. You could just remember the XVIII century partition of Poland, the war between Home Army and Armia Ludowa. Andrzej Wajda knew those stories, but he thought that there were some Poles who could lead the people to the brighter future.

Maciej Tomczyk is shown as one of those Poles. Because of him and others, the striking people achieved the impossible – the recognition from the Party officials. Despite that, the director is not optimistic – today’s victory could be followed by bloody tomorrow.

This victory is without parades, hymns and fireworks. But a bunch of people have changed the world. Tomorrow they could be executed, but tonight they have drawn the attention of the world and have written their names in History. They showed that no state is all-powerful. The state wanted Men of Marble in order to break them easier, but finally they got Men of Iron, who couldn’t be broken too easily.

In his dilogy, Andrzej Wajda gave the mirror to the Poles and made them watch. Andrzej Wajda thought that you shouldn’t lie or forget about the past or ignore the present. Instead of that, let’s watch this films together.

The Childhood of a Leader

It's sort of about the birth of a megalomaniac

The Childhood of a Leader is a loose adaptation of Jean-Paul Sartre's short story The Childhood of a Leader and John Fowles's novel The Magus (plagiarizing Wikipedia). Sadly, I have read the Sartre’s story long time ago and I haven’t read the Fowles’s novel. Nevertheless, in my opinion, the film draws inspiration from another famous book.

In 1931, an Italian journalist and writer Curzio Malaparte wrote Coup D'etat: The Technique of revolution. Near the end of the book, the author wrote about dark, psychic and sexual nature of dictatorship. The author also noted the main traits of dictators – envy. Curzio Malaparte stated that dictatorship is not merely the form of rule, but also the most complete intellectual, political and moral manifestation of the envy.

The Childhood of a Leader portrays the formation of a dictator. You should also note, that Malaparte has written that dictators have a strong feminine side. This thesis is illustrated by distortion of Prescott’s gender identification – he wears a dress and has long hairs. Also, Prescott suffers from enuresis, which is the part of the Macdonald triad.

The psychoanalysis claims that the person is formed by interaction with parents. First of all, the film drops hints about illegitimacy of Prescott. The parents of Prescott are portrayed as cold and indifferent persons, who are more interested in themselves, than in their son. Even the first minutes portrays Prescott as a «strange child» (to put it mildly).

The director narrates the storyline as three caprices. If the first caprice (throwing of stones in the church) looks as an innocent childish prank, the second and third caprice vividly portrays the dark inner world of Prescott. The picture of the film is also very gloomy – the devastated French village, poor houses and old maids.

The not-so-good reviews and synopsizes claims that formation of Prescott was dictated by witnessing his father in drafting the Versailles accord. But I think that it is a product of not-so-attentive watching. In my opinion, the director used a classical trick – contrast. The director portrays how at the seemingly triumphant time for the democracy grows a beast, who will demolish democracy once and for all.

Watch this film and maybe you will not laugh, when you will read that «1 in 5 CEOs are psychopaths».

Panna Nikt

Panna Nikt

In 1996, Andrzej Zulawski shot his «film without mask» - Szamanka. The same year, Andrzej Wajda shot his own film on the post-socialist Poland – Panna Nikt. The critic consensus always was that Andrzej Wajda was a master of the political, historical and societal films. But it is not entirely true, even judging by my limited acquaintance with the Wajda’s films. Not counting Panna Nikt, I have seen six films of Andrzej Wajda. Among them, there is a sarcastic comedy about a loser (Polowanie na muchy) and his own «8 ½» (Wszystko na sprzedaz).

Of course, the choice of a seventy-year old (back than) director is rather surprising – a teenage drama. This genre has known failures by young filmmakers, what can seventy-year old man shoot about the youth?

The early post-socialist history of Poland and Russia knows many similarities. You could merely name the nouveau riche culture, the economic shock therapy and the fast breaking of the old societal norms and customs. During the Socialism the major advantage was power, during the Capitalism the advantage shifted from power to money. Of course, the cities were the most affected by this and the villages were more conservative.

Andrzej Wajda showed this shift in the history of a 15-year girl called Marysia, who moved with her family from the village to the city. In the beginning of the film, Marysia symbolizes the Catholic and Conservative Poland. After moving to the city, Marysia starts associating herself with new Poland. The first act of her transformation deals with her haircut. If in the beginning she has traditional long hairs, in the city she changes it to a short haircut.

Any revolutionary changes are characterized not by merely economic and political changes, but also by conformity of old-timers. Andrej Wajda portrays this change in a teenage group. Marysia wants to morph in the new society and even abandons her name and adopts her new nicknames – Minka and Maika.

The new era is symbolized by new morals (or in some cases – the lack of it) and imaginary mixing of different classes. Marysia is fascinated by financial independence of her new girlfriends; she becomes an ardent pupil in permissiveness. She even thinks that she is truly accepted by the nouveau riche circles. Nevertheless, she forgets an old lessons – the rich could temporarily embrace the poor, but they will treat the late as an equal.

The 1990s got a profound impact on the Eastern European cinema. After getting the freedom, a majority of directors began shooting films about crime and sex. But there are some exceptions. Andrzej Wajda was no longer obliged to shoot film with hidden messages (quoting Andrzej Zulawski: «the films with masks») and he made a portrait of new Poland. He showed the teenagers, because one day they will become rulers.

The seventy year old filmmaker did something, which is not possible for some twenty year old man. Andrzej Wajda portrayed the real teenage relationship, without exaggerating or softening. Everyone would see themselves or some friends in Marysia, Kasia and Ewa. I recommend to watch this film to anyone, who was born in the 1980-1990s.

Sadly, the thought of Wajda that «no, the ashes does not hold the glory of a starlike diamond» is still quite truthful.