Tunner, we're not tourists.
We're travelers
In foreword to 1998 rerelease of «The Sheltering Sky» Paul
Bowles wrote not-so-praising words about screen adaption of this book, done by
Bernardo Bertolucci, summarizing them by those words: «But the less said about
the film now, the better». Bernardo Bertolucci, recalling the experience of
making «The Conformist» - an adaptation of the same titled novel by Alberto
Moravia, said, that sometimes necessary to «betray» the book in order to make
the film faithful to it. «The Conformist» was such good betrayal, that it even
surpassed the book. Could we say the same words about «The Sheltering Sky»?
In the early 1980s, Bernardo Bertolucci was in a state
of the great artistic crisis and in order to overcome it, he went to LA in
order to fulfill his old dream – to make an adaptation of «Red Harvest» by Dashiell
Hammett. After spending four fruitless years in LA, Bertolucci went to, back
then the most unusual place, China. In this country, he regained inspiration
and made «The Last Emperor». And the most important of all, after visiting
China Bertolucci started again to love the West. So, the story about a couple,
which travels to Sahara, in order to repair the marriage, seemed interesting to
the Director.
Paul Bowles book is quite hard to adapt as a standard
two-hour film. «The Sheltering Sky» is full of stories and important dialogues,
which all should be adapted in the film. And, finally, the director must
picture the alienation of two Americans in alien and hostile Sahara, which
destroy any intruder. Before watching, I thought, that Bertolucci would be able
to pull it off.
In the beginning of the novel, an Arab Smail tells
Port Moresby a parable about three Arab girls, who are desiring to drink tea on
the highest dune of Sahara (which were
not, strangely, integrated in the film). They were able to get to the
highest dune of Sahara and have decided to get a little sleep before tea. A few
weeks later, a passing caravan found three dead girls and their cups were full
of sand.
Port and Kit Moresby are the representatives of NYC
intellectual bohemians. Port is a composer; Kit is a playwright. Their feelings
have ceded and Port, hoping to breathe new life into dying marriage, convinces
Kit to take a trip to the Northern Africa. Tunner forces himself as a companion
on the trip, and they start their trip. After getting rid of Tunner, Port takes
Kit to the heart of Sahara, but he gets a typhoid fever.
In the beginning of «Lawrence of Arabia», Diplomat
Dryden tell to Lieutenant Lawrence the following words: « Lawrence, only two
kinds of creatures get fun in the desert: Bedouins and gods, and you're neither».
Port thinks that the desert would purify him, and after crossing it with Kit,
they would emerge as new people, who love each other. In order to achieve this,
Port even agrees to forfeit his identity. In reality, the desert would do
anything to destroy the aliens.
Sadly, Bernardo Bertolucci was not able to completely
portray the ideas of Paul Bowles. While watching, you constantly feel, that the
film lacks something, which makes it great, compared to «The Last Emperor». The
Director focuses on a theme of combatting the family crisis and basically kept
out such themes, as the said «three sisters» parable, clash between European, American
and Arab culture and threw away a certain amount of secondary characters.
Another substantial weakness of «The Sheltering Sky» is
a choice of an actress for the role of Kit. While Debra Winger is assisted by
John Malkovich, she is quite OK. But in the third part of novel, Kit steps out
and Debra Winger is not too convincing.
That is why, the process of Kit’s spiritual degradation is not portrayed good
enough. Despite that, the other actors filled their roles quite convincingly.
Despite the flaws of meaning, the form is beyond all
praise. Bernardo Bertolucci was able to capture a very beautiful shots of
desert , which is ruthless and hostile for strangers, and views of shabby Arab
towns, full of flies and beggars. Ryuichi Sakamoto soundtrack deserves a
separate mention. His music tunes a viewer to a right wave, which is never
quite fully emerges.
The best films of Bertolucci are visually and
intellectually stunning. Sadly, this time, the visual thing has prevailed over
the intellectual one, and that is why the film is weaker than the best films of
Bertolucci. Despite that, I don’t agree with Paul Bowles critique and I
consider this film as worthy of watching, but I recommend you to read the book
before that.
No comments:
Post a Comment