Queer (2024)

Luca Guadagnino | 2hr 16min

Early in Queer, we delve into writer William Lee’s nightmare of his friends in prison, an abandoned baby, and a naked woman bisected along her torso. The symbolism opaquely hints at the guilt harboured by William Burroughs, the real-life novelist who based this troubled character off himself, though it is his response to this woman questioning his sexuality which articulates the film’s most layered metaphor.

“I’m not queer. I’m disembodied.”

The separation between Lee’s self-loathing thoughts and pleasure-seeking instincts drives a wedge into the core of his identity as a gay man, and is further reflected in Luca Guadagnino’s dissociative direction, often letting the writer’s mind escape his physical being. Early in his relationship with the much younger Eugene, Lee’s yearning is often rendered as a transparent, ghostly version of himself reaching out to caress his face or lean on his shoulder, though it also manifests even more darkly in his indulgent vices. Drugs and alcohol offer easy escapes from the shame of his sexuality, and even sex too ironically satiates that desire for euphoric sensation as it simultaneously feeds that underlying guilt.

Guadagnino calls back to silent cinema techniques with his double exposure effects, ethereally manifesting Lee’s longing.

The 1950s was not a particularly hospitable time for the gay community, yet there was also a certain level of privilege that came with living as a white man in Mexico City which Lee and his similarly ostracised friends use as a social counterbalance. This circle of outsiders is relatively insular, so when Eugene arrives at their local bar flirting with both men and women, Lee is instantly drawn to his mysterious allure. This is a man who hides his emotions so well that others question whether he really is gay, striking an intense contrast against our verbose protagonist’s overbearing tendency to persistently chase interactions. When Lee leans in, Eugene often hesitantly pulls away, making the few moments of organic connection between all the more valuable.

Vibrant set designs lifted a layer from the real world, saturated with colour yet often underscoring Lee’s loneliness.

There was never any doubting Daniel Craig’s talents during his time as James Bond, though the performance he delivers here as the eloquently eccentric Lee is his most layered yet, leaning into the weariness of a middle-aged man whose existential insecurities are only amplified by his ageing. He inhabits a world that is one level removed from our reality, filling in the malaise with the bold, bright colours that often decorate Pedro Almodóvar’s melodramas. Within the lush purple and red lighting of a hotel bedroom and the yellow décor of his apartment, his inner life is given passionate outward expression, though Guadagnino’s stylistic achievement does not end there either. From a distance, the city is often whimsically rendered through miniatures, making cars look like toys and buildings like dollhouses. In an ending that thoughtfully borrows from the final act of 2001: A Space Odyssey, this visual motif pays off when Lee hallucinates another version of himself inside a diorama of the hotel where he is staying, further splitting his mind and his body between entirely different realms.

Guadagnino’s use of miniatures feeds into Lee’s feeling of disembodiment – the world doesn’t seem quite right, driving a wedge between his mind and reality.
A dream sequence inspired by 2001: A Space Odyssey with multiple versions of Lee occupying the same space.
Inside the surreal dollhouse hotel, drenched in deep red.

The height of Queer’s surrealism though arrives when Lee and Eugene venture into the deep jungles of South America, seeking a plant which is said to grant telepathic abilities. It is no wonder why Lee should be so obsessed with such a prospect – if the rumours are true, then perhaps this higher form of communication is a treatment for his emotional isolation, allowing a union of souls which regular conversation and sex cannot attain.

A search for enlightenment through experimentation with hallucinogens, transcending the restraints of the physical world.

Although Guadagnino largely maintains the novella’s literary quality through his chapter breaks, he takes creative liberties in departing from its depiction of the drug trip here. Where the source material saw Lee disappointed by its underwhelming effects, the film submits to the psychedelia, having him and Eugene literally vomit out their hearts before exposing their truest feelings. “I’m not queer,” Eugene asserts, formally echoing Lee’s earlier words as his body fades from view during their hallucinogenic drug trip. “I’m just disembodied.” Indeed, these two men have never been more detached from their physical beings, and have never been more in synchrony as their bodies grotesquely merge into one. Limbs move beneath fused skin as they dance, and for one precious night, Lee truly escapes his shame and transcends his loneliness.

Body horror and surrealism as Lee and Eugene merge into a single being, making a euphoric yet fleeting connection between divided souls.

This drug is not some portal into some other place though, their dealer Dr. Cotter is sure to warn them. It is a mirror into one’s soul, offering a glimpse at whatever desires and fears lurk beneath their consciousness. Its euphoria is short-lived, particularly for Eugene who wakes up the next morning anxious and eager to leave. It is a terrifying thing losing a part of oneself to another person, and when faced with the truth of his relationship with Lee, he sees its toxicity for what it is.

The recurring centipede is one of Guadagnino’s more cryptic symbols in Queer, and its unsettling appearance in Lee’s dream of Eugene many years after their breakup continues to hold him in an unresolved state of suspension. Just as it first appeared around the neck of a one-night stand, the centipede now marks Eugene as another fleeting lover, manifesting the real-life Burroughs’ self-confessed fear and cherished literary motif. Lee’s story is unfinished in Guadagnino’s eyes, leaving him a half-complete man torn between dualities – shame and indulgence, connection and independence, mind and body. As long as he strives to separate rather than reconcile these parts of his identity, he will continue to live in a world of dissociative nightmares, spiritually and psychologically divorced from himself. Through the colourful, eerie patterns that Guadagnino consequently uncovers in Lee’s character, Queer delivers an unflinching fever dream that denies easy answers to his internal contradictions, constantly unravelling his capacity for love by his fear of being seen.

Guadagnino’s narrative is brimming with symbolic motifs, particularly borrowing the unsettling centipede from Burrough’s own works as a manifestation of Lee’s insecurity.

Queer is currently available to rent or buy on Apple TV and Amazon Video.

Maria (2024)

Pablo Larraín | 2hr 3min

Opera singer Maria Callas’ astonishing talent is both her greatest gift and curse in Pablo Larraín’s dreamy, melancholy biopic, giving her reason to live and simultaneously eating her up inside as she navigates the final week of her extraordinary life. “Happiness never gave us a beautiful melody,” she informs the filmmakers creating a documentary about her career. “Music is born of distress and poverty.”

It’s no surprise that a woman who was forced to sing to fascist officers as a child during World War II should attach such negative associations to her craft, yet the self-confessed intoxication she feels when performing nevertheless binds her to this deep-rooted sorrow. Callas is a woman of magnificent contradictions, and it is in the collision between those extremes where the disorientating, nostalgic surrealism of Maria takes form, painting a complex portrait of both soaring exultation and abject misery.

Maria Callas wanders around the golden glow of Paris in all black, keeping a low profile as her physical and mental health continue to slide.

These have been common themes throughout Larraín’s trilogy of historical female icons, beginning with Jackie’s intimate meditation on grief and Spencer’s interrogation of disintegrating identity. In Maria, the Chilean director once again weaves his protagonist’s declining physical and mental health into a fragmented narrative, though this time merging the pensive flashbacks and ethereal hallucinations of its respective precursors. Choruses and orchestras seem to manifest all through Callas’s Parisian wanderings, inviting her to take the stage, while shaky rehearsals are deftly intercut with visions of those elaborate performances that she once delivered to adoring audiences. Even the aforementioned documentary crew is revealed early on to be a concoction of her lonely mind longing for those bygone days of cultural relevance, consuming her in the crushing, psychological isolation of a life in the public eye.

Orchestras, choruses, and a documentary film crew follow Callas wherever she goes, summoning up the glory of her youth and fame.

Angelina Jolie’s celebrity status has often been more anchored in her star power than her acting talent, so the delicate vulnerability she displays as an ailing Callas quite easily stands as her finest achievement to date. She inhabits the troubled soprano as a fragile shadow of herself, lingering in a space between life and death where reality fades away and memories flood back stronger than ever. She is visibly pained when listening to her old records, overwhelmed by the musical perfection that her voice will never match again, even as she hopelessly tries to recover it along with her dignity during private lessons. When a resentful fan confronts her over a show that she cancelled years ago due to poor health, she bites back with indignant fury, yet still she carries immense guilt over her inability to live up to the divine, immaculate image of her younger self.

Angelina Jolie’s singular greatest acting achievement to date, piercing the depths of this tormented character with incredible vulnerability.

With the accomplished Edward Lachman by Larraín’s side too as cinematographer, Maria develops an elegant visual style to match Jolie’s enchanting aura. There is a touch of Jean Renoir’s poetic realism in the camera’s gentle gliding through her lavish Parisian apartment, using embellished doorways and mirrors as frames for Larraín’s grand production design. One wide shot angled into her living area from the next room over even makes for a gorgeous bookend, setting a stage which effectively turns her passing into an opera.

Lavish mise-en-scène in Callas’ Parisian apartment, decorated with chandeliers, luxurious furniture, and a grand piano she constantly has moved around.
Beautiful framing through mirrors, isolating Jolie in her extravagant surroundings.

The handheld camerawork and zooms which mimic the archival footage laced throughout Maria don’t blend so smoothly with the otherwise graceful aesthetic on display, so Larraín is smart to restrain these elements. The shift to black-and-white photography in flashbacks rather stands as the stronger formal contrast to Callas’ present-day story, maintaining its visual majesty while underscoring another sadness which has long been by her side. After leaving her husband for wealthy business magnate Aristotle Onassis, she finds herself swept away by his charm, yet frequently subjected to his imposing demands. She was to reduce her public performances, he decided, and the abortion she got for him had devastating long-term effects on her body. Nevertheless, this is the man that Callas would harbour feelings for her entire life, eventually making peace with him on his deathbed.

Larraín maintains the visual elegance of tracking shots and gorgeous production design in flashbacks, but formally sets them apart from the present day with a melancholy monochrome.
Recreations of archival footage blend historical authenticity with dreamy surrealism, simultaneously examining Callas from the inside and outside.

That Aristotle would marry Jackie Kennedy following his affair with Callas makes for a fascinating plot point in Maria, if for no other reason than the connection Larraín is consciously drawing to the first film in his unofficial biopic trilogy. While JFK is played by Caspar Phillipson, reprising his role from Jackie, the beloved First Lady influences the narrative entirely offscreen. Callas regards her with reverence and even a bit of jealousy, going out of her way to avoid crossing paths so that she needn’t face her former lover’s wife. The fact that these two distinguished women should be caught in each other’s orbits only further enriches Larraín’s framing of Callas’ life, constantly trying to measure up to a standard of sublime feminine grace that always seems out of reach.

Larraín is wise to narrow in on a critical moment in Callas’ life, just as he did in Jackie and Spencer. This is Callas at her most vulnerable, wracked with drug addiction, eating disorders, and poor mental health.

Clearly this pressure takes a physical toll on Callas as well, inflicting drug addictions, eating disorders, and strained vocal cords which inhibit her singing. Although she tries to sustain hopeless fantasies of a thriving career, it is only in understanding the root of her nostalgia that she is able to salvage the residual beauty of her art.

“My mother made me sing. Onassis forbade me to sing. And now, I will sing for myself.”

As she stands by her apartment window and delivers a final, aching rendition of ‘Vissi d’arte’ from Puccini’s Tosca, she once again connects to that joy and sorrow which fuelled her passion for many years. “I lived for art, I lived for love,” she exults in Italian, while begging for a heavenly answer to her lonely prayer.

“In this hour of grief, why, why, Lord, why do you reward me thus?”

Larraín is not one to end his biopic with expository text spelling out his subject’s legacy. Maria’s blend of archival film and ethereal impressionism paints a far more complete, evocative portrait of the legendary prima donna than any biography ever could, framed in a fleeting moment of vulnerability when her tormented soul was thoroughly exposed. There within the dimming spotlight, where art is produced solely for its creator, the liberation it ushers in is enough to release the most weary, forsaken artist from a lifetime of agonising perfection.

Recapturing the sublime beauty of her art, even if for a brief moment – Callas ascends to divine heights.

Maria is currently playing in theatres.

Fellini’s Casanova (1976)

Federico Fellini | 2hr 28min

Each time famed adventurer Giacomo Casanova tumbles into another sexual escapade during his worldly travels, his wind-up bird is right there by his side, bobbing and flapping its wings in suggestive, mechanical motions. As both a literal and figurative cock, its phallic shape is not easily missed, casting giant shadows on the wall much like its owner’s. In any other sex scene, in any other film, it would be jarringly out of place – this act is meant to be one loaded with spontaneous passion after all, vulnerably exposing humanity’s most primal instincts. Within the lecherous ventures of Fellini’s Casanova though, this bird is simply an extension of the Venetian playboy’s libido, consistently ticking along like a metronome to Nino Rota’s contrived score of rigid, unwavering synths.

Though based on the memoirs of the real Casanova and his expansive voyage through 18th century Europe, Federico Fellini’s reimagining of his life manifests with demented surrealism, twisting the historical figure into a man trapped in cycles of meaningless carnal exploits. Sex in this decrepit world is not an expression of deep yearning, but rather an imitation of pleasure performed out of obligation, as if trying to convince oneself of an authentic, sensual connection that simply isn’t there.

Within Casanova’s lecherous ventures, the mechanical bird is simply an extension of the Venetian playboy’s libido, consistently ticking along like a metronome to Nino Rota’s contrived score of rigid, unwavering synths.

The giant head of Venus which sinks to the bottom of Venice’s Grand Canal in the opening scene becomes a symbolic reminder of this too, returning in the film’s final scene beneath the frozen surface to illustrate the abiding death of everything the goddess of love represents. In her absence, lovemaking is dispassionately chaotic. Coital partners seesaw in the most untitillating manner possible, while Fellini’s camera rocks and zooms in jerky motions as if synchronised to the ensemble’s outrageous acting.

The sunken head of Venus bookends Fellini’s Casanova – a mythic symbol of love trapped in icy waters.

Even outside of these scenes Casanova does not mark a significant achievement for Donald Sutherland, and yet his effeminate, foppish spin on the great Venetian adventurer nevertheless fits perfectly within Fellini’s garish scenery, thinly concealing a deeply insecure ego. After all, it is not his sexual vitality, but his intellectual pursuits as “a poet, philosopher, mathematician” which he would rather be known for – but if his prodigious reputation for bedding women is to be his legacy, then who is he to deny this extraordinary talent?

By the time Fellini adapted Casanova’s autobiography in the mid-1970s, he was no stranger to reshaping classical texts and historical eras with lurid experimentation, frequently sacrificing narrative convention in favour of episodic vignettes. As such, Fellini’s Casanova bears especially close resemblance to his cinematic interpretation of the Ancient Roman text Satyricon, which similarly journeyed through warped, theatrical landscapes that never seemed to feel the touch of natural sunlight. Casanova’s excursion to a Venetian island where a wealthy voyeur pays to watch him sexually perform lays the brazen theatricality bare in the opening scenes, sailing his boat across a black sea of billowing tarp, while his convergence with civilisation brings astoundingly anachronistic renderings of 18th century high society. Fellini carries a Sternbergian sense of unruly excess here as he clutters his colourful mise-en-scène with candles, statues, and exorbitantly large plates of food, painting Baroque portraits of overindulgence fuelled by an insatiable emptiness, and curating cinematic galleries of incredible orgiastic anarchy.

Aggressively theatrical mise-en-scène, floating Casanova’s boat atop an ocean of black, billowing tarp.
Fellini carries a Sternbergian sense of unruly excess here as he clutters his colourful mise-en-scène with candles, statues, and exorbitantly large plates of food, painting Baroque portraits of overindulgence fuelled by an insatiable emptiness.

In Rome, Casanova is invited to the patrician palace of the British ambassador, where a deranged party of obscene games demeans the surrounding historical art that once signified class and decorum. There, his pretentious attempts to wax lyrical philosophy are met with bewilderment, and to curry favour he instead participates in a contest with a peasant to determine who can sexually perform the most times in the space of an hour. In London, he attends a hypnotically gloomy Frost Fair on the River Thames, where he moves on from the suicidal grief of losing his girlfriend to another man and instead pins his new obsession on a royal giantess. Later in Württemberg he attends what is meant to be “the most beautiful court in Europe,” and yet which rather appears as a haywire nightmare of insane aristocrats wreaking havoc, while musicians fill the air with a dissonant cacophony emerging from the pianos and organs hanging off the walls.

Casanova moves from one party to the next, encountering bizarre characters and adventures, yet never quite finding the fulfilment he seeks.
A haywire nightmare in Württemberg, where musicians fill the air with a dissonant cacophony emerging from the pianos and organs hanging off the walls.
A dazzling composition of chandeliers hanging above Casanova at the opera – with his bigger budgets, Fellini does not half-commit to his production design.

The disconnection between these wandering vignettes somewhat hurts the overall form of Casanova, and yet this detachment also serves to underscore the wistful isolation at the core of Sutherland’s performance, elevating the moment where he discovers what he deems true love. It is during his adventures in Germany that he meets Rosalba, a life-sized mechanical doll who dances stiffly with the voyager like a ballerina in a music box, and whose only objection to his sexual advances is a silent, pained grimace. She is a bastion of unchanging purity in this world of absurdist mayhem – a clockwork contraption not unlike Casanova’s metal bird who reflects his desire for fastidious control over his emotions, relationships, and libido.

Rosalba the mechanical may be Casanova’s one true love, becoming bastion of unchanging purity in this world of absurdist mayhem.

Clearly little has changed in the decades that pass between their awkwardly romantic tryst and Casanova’s retirement from travelling, choosing to take up the role of librarian in a cold, draughty Bohemian castle as he approaches the end of his life. Still he attempts to impress audiences with dull poetry recitations, and still he is ridiculed for his pomposity, leaving him to retreat in shame to his darkened chamber where dreams of waltzing with Rosalba upon an icy Venetian lagoon await. As Rota’s music box motif tinkles a soft, metallic melody for the last time, they rotate like tiny figurines, eternally frozen in plastic. There, at the end of this traveller’s long life, Fellini finally reveals the impossible fantasy which has eluded him through many cities, parties, and romances – the frigid, lifeless embrace of a woman as hopelessly inhuman as him.

Resigned to the end of an empty life, Casanova retreats into his imagination with Rosalba. As Nino Rota’s music box motif tinkles a soft, metallic melody for the last time, they rotate like tiny figurines, eternally frozen in plastic.

Fellini’s Casanova as currently available to purchase from Amazon.

El Conde (2023)

Pablo Larraín | 1hr 50min

The grotesque metaphor that El Conde poses is simple enough in its Gothic iconography, comparing Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet’s legacy to that of a vampire parasitically living off society’s most vulnerable. The social context surrounding Pablo Larraín’s satirical target certainly hits closer to home for the director than the other cultural figures he previously examined in Jackie and Spencer, and yet there is a universality to this historical revisionism which sees Pinochet take his oppressive totalitarianism to the world stage.

Horrified by the subversive violence he witnessed in his youth fighting against the French Revolution, this fictional version of the famous tyrant subsequently spent centuries combatting further uprisings across the world, before beginning his despotic reign in late twentieth century Chile. Larraín’s sardonic depiction of Pinochet is not so much a faithful rendering of the former president as he is an outlandish icon of dictatorship, feverishly feeding on citizens of the working class who won’t be missed, while his disloyal inner circle desperately hope that their close acquaintance might grant them their most selfish desires.

The historical revisionism swings hard from the start, reframing Pinochet as the enemy of many revolutions over several centuries before he became the famous dictator.
Larraín’s ominous expressionism is a perfect visual fit for this vampiric allegory, cutting out ominous silhouettes from Pinochet’s billowing cape.
Decrepit mise-en-scène inside Pinochet’s rural farmhouse, wearing away with his age and relevance.

After many years of estrangement, the five Pinochet children who have denounced their father’s evils arrive at his hidden estate in the Andes to claim their inheritance, hypocritically disregarding how the fortune was unethically amassed. The nun who has come to exorcise the devil from his body also falls hard for his seductive promises of power, inspiring jealousy in his wife Lucía who wants nothing more than to be bitten and become similarly immortal. As for the retired dictator himself, there is very little tethering him to his miserable half-life, leaving him to consequently give up drinking blood and let himself die. If only it were that simple – the curse of vampirism has doomed an aged Pinochet to eternal banality, never quite regaining the vitality of his youthful rule, and equally never finding the cold release of death.

Larraín announces the deadpan satire early with the bright pink opening credits set against gorgeous monochrome cinematography.
El Conde has the severe framing and landscapes of an early Ingmar Bergman film, emphasising the complete barrenness of the Chilean countryside.

Right from the opening credits, Larraín’s bright pink font sardonically nods at the campness underlying the darkness of Pinochet’s decrepit existence, though between here and the final scene he does not waver from his bold, monochrome aesthetic. The harsh silhouettes cut out from Pinochet’s caped figure as he stands alone in Gothic interiors bear striking resemblance to the Iranian vampire film A Girl Walks Home Alone at Night, but the severe landscapes of foggy coastlines and mountains call back even more distinctly to Ingmar Bergman’s early work in The Seventh Seal. With Pinochet standing in for the physical manifestation of Death, Chile’s cities and countryside are similarly haunted by unholy abominations and mysterious deaths, revealing a rot that has infected the soul of humanity – not explicitly the result of an absent God, but rather the lingering trauma of modern fascism.

An excellent early frame of the nuns in their church, defined in opposition to Pinochet’s black silhouette with their stark white habits.

As Larraín would have it, God in fact plays a very active role in this dark fairy tale, distorted through the corrupt vessel of the Roman Catholic Church. Sister Carmen emerges like a spectre from a choir of white-clad nuns in a vast, stony cathedral, prophesied to “destroy dreams and bring misery” with her “white, innocent flesh.” Disguised as an accountant, she enters Pinochet’s estate and immediately charms the vampire with her fluent French, before sitting down with each family member and conducting a thorough audit of his extraordinary wealth. Larraín lands us right in the middle of these interrogations too, intimately centre framing both Carmen and the subjects of her probing as they spill secrets of Pinochet’s criminal exploits, figuratively embodied in parallel scenes of his vicious, bloody hunt.

Larraín’s editing proves to be a sharp tool in this Gothic metaphor, visually comparing tales of Pinochet’s historical exploits against his bloody hunt for fresh victims.

The intercutting here is harsh in its visual juxtaposition, associating tales of Pinochet’s unrestrained political power with images of him ravenously licking the blood of an elderly woman off his fingers, and disembowelling a labourer working a late-night shift. His legacy has not been officially memorialised through busts in Chile’s presidential palace, leaving him to pathetically fill his own empty spot among its sculpted leaders, and yet it continues to creep into the homes and workplaces of ordinary citizens who still feel its insidious reverberations.

Political satire savagely cutting down Pinochet’s legacy in a single image, feebly positioning him between the busts of those Chilean leaders remembered more fondly.

If there was any hope of good triumphing over evil in El Conde, then it lies in Carmen and her holy quest to rid the world of Pinochet once and for all. As she grows closer to her target though, another political allegory begins to emerge, chillingly illustrating a conspiratorial alliance of the church and state. As she takes to the overcast skies and learns to fly for the first time after being turned, Larraín delivers what may be the singularly most beautiful scene of the film, floating his camera along as she awkwardly tumbles and falls over Pinochet’s farm like Jesicca Chastain in The Tree of Life. Just as her clumsy flailing strikes a very different image to his smooth gliding over cities and islands, her billowing white robe also contrasts boldly against his black cape stretched out behind him, framing them as two halves of a single power – light and dark, youth and old age, church and state.

Carmen soars and tumbles through the air above Pinochet’s farm – a beautifully surreal demonstration of the church and state’s supernatural alliance.
Meanwhile, Pinochet takes to the sky in these gorgeous overhead shots, his cape stretched out behind him as he surveils the land he once ruled as president, and continues to wield considerable power over.

Unfortunately for Carmen though, this romance will only survive for as long as it serves her new master. Pinochet’s gruesomely comical obsession with Marie Antoinette serves up the perfect inspiration for his muse’s latest look, ironically imposing on her an oppressive control that bears significant resemblance to the French Queen’s deprived agency in her own lifetime. The arrival of a new power on the estate also brings a sharp end to her story beneath the blade of a guillotine, finally revealing the identity of our mysterious narrator whose clipped British accent and English speech has curiously mismatched the rest of the cast’s Spanish and French.

Pinochet worships Marie Antoinette’s legacy, keeping her head as a souvenir and dressing up his muse in her likeness – an amusing touch to this historical satire.

Larraín’s hilariously flamboyant twist will not be spoiled here, but the global cabal of blood-sucking vampires it paints out with dark humour can at least be mentioned without ruining any major surprises, expanding the scope of El Conde’s satirical revisionism. While the descendants of fascism are quietly profiting off its hoarded plunder and its self-interested lovers are realising they are only safe for as long as they remain useful, the only other figure that can truly understand a tyrant like Pinochet is a fellow tyrant. “This is what the count achieved,” our notorious narrator acutely observes. “Beyond the killing, his life’s work was to turn us into heroes of greed.”

These immortal manifestations of authoritarianism have spent their entire lives putting revolutionaries across the world in their place – not always succeeding, but never dying out either. History traps us in a cycle of never learning from our own mistakes, and so while the man known as Augusto Pinochet may have withered away, Larraín pessimistically hints at a younger form of totalitarianism restoring its historical ideals. El Conde’s formal switch from black-and-white to colour in the final scene may offer its Gothic aesthetic a similar rejuvenation, though the dark, angry hearts of these human parasites continue to beat in the chests of future generations, waiting for the day humanity grows complacent enough to let a new Pinochet kill and pillage their way to unlimited power.

El Conde’s switch to colour in the final minutes makes for a powerful formal device, rejuvenating Larraín’s dilapidated aesthetic as a modern form of totalitarianism is reborn for a future generation.

El Conde is currently streaming on Netflix.

All These Women (1964)

Ingmar Bergman | 1hr 20min

There is little wonder why All These Women has been so maligned over the years as one of Ingmar Bergman’s worst films. This brightly coloured pastiche is about the furthest thing one could imagine from the black-and-white meditations on faith and love which have defined his greatest artistic triumphs up to this point. Even his previous comedies such as Smiles of a Summer Night carry a more eloquent wit than the slapstick and buffoonery he happily indulges in here, and which one snobbish music critic awkwardly inflicts on the film’s country chateau setting while visiting famed cellist Felix. Cornelius hopes to write a biography on the reclusive musician and additionally get his own composition broadcast on the radio, but unfortunately his host has made himself scarce, leaving the writer in the hands of his seven female companions. Bergman is swinging wildly in all directions with his comedy, but the point of his derision is firm – this industry of artists and critics is a totally vacuous farce.

Quite significantly, All These Women also marks Bergman’s foray into colour filmmaking, imbuing Felix’s grand summer estate with a Baroque radiance that is ironically tempered in a largely monochrome production design. The towering candelabras, marble floors, and undecorated walls are pristine in their silvery whiteness, while costumes and the odd piece of furnishing imprint dark shapes on the mise-en-scène. As such, the small flourishes of colour that Bergman inserts truly stand out in his scenery. The flowing pink gown Cornelius wears while in disguise, the dusty orange sunrise shedding light across Felix’s bedroom, and the vivid red outfits at his final concert each become the centrepiece of multiple compositions, many of which carry the symmetrical precision of Peter Greenaway’s films.

Bergman’s first film shot in colour is a lush display of vibrant visual direction – clearly influences of Michael Powell and Jean-Luc Godard in the set and costume designs.

Of course, Greenaway was still sixteen years away from his cinema debut at this point though. Bergman’s actual influences here are incredibly diverse, appropriating the Technicolor vibrancy of Michael Powell’s mannered dramas, the heightened physical comedy of the Marx Brothers’ zany hijinks, and the formal self-reflexivity of Jean-Luc Godard’s genre deconstructions. Though a little subtler, the parody of Federico Fellini’s in All These Women is also notable. Both films share a dazzling Italian spa set and a postmodern critique of artistic egos, but Bergman’s strongest critique of the Italian filmmaker is directed at his relationship with women.

Despite the choice to shoot in colour, Bergman still often builds sets out of black-and-white, emphasising isolated splashes of vibrant hues – here, the red quill.

Much like Guido’s dream in , Felix is surrounded by a harem of adoring female fans in All These Women, played by many of Bergman’s frequent collaborators including Eva Dahlbeck, Harriet Andersson, and Bibi Andersson. There are seven in total, many bearing nicknames drawn from art history, Irish legend, and Christian theology. Bumblebee is his “official” mistress who takes an immediate liking to the foppish Cornelius, while Adelaide is his discontent wife, and Isolde is the flirty chambermaid. Filling out the rest of the female ensemble is Felix’s ageing patroness, his student protégé, his young cousin, and his piano accompanist, each serving their own clearly defined roles in his home, and collectively serving his outsized ego.

All These Women is closer to Peter Greenaway in its visual design than any other Ingmar Bergman. A rapid yet brief shift of gears that pays off in this instance, despite its formal flaws.

Though the imagery he crafts from his rigorous blocking of these women clearly indicates a director who has trained in the art of visual composition, it still possesses more of a still-life, painterly aesthetic than we have seen from Bergman before. Characters pose in tableaux of upper-class elegance around lounges, sculptures, and grand pianos, making for a brilliantly jarring contrast to his otherwise lowbrow humour. While the women gossip at the poolside surrounded by Greek-style columns and sculptures, Bergman ruptures a splendidly composed wide shot with Cornelius’ abrupt appearance in a swan-shaped pool float. The critic’s humiliation only intensifies when later pushed to dress in unconvincing drag, hoping that he might finally be granted audience if Felix believes there is a new woman on the estate. Even the musician’s graceful cello music has an incongruent counterpoint in the recurring instrumental motif of ‘Yes! We Have No Bananas’, amusingly shifting musical styles with each new variation.

Visual comedy played in wides like Charlie Chaplin and the Marx Brothers, even turning to drag as a source of laughs.

Still, for a director like Bergman with such powerful command over comedy and drama though, it is evident that he is not always playing to his strengths. Some of the film’s harshest critics will point to its sped-up chase scenes, overlong physical gags, and parts of Jarl Kulle’s exaggerated performance as evidence of the film’s messiness, and they aren’t entirely wrong. Even with the targets of Bergman’s satire in mind, much of this humour is far too clumsy.

When Bergman develops his comedy with a little more self-awareness though, he hits on something far more inspired. One could almost imagine Monty Python pulling off a similar trick when he cuts away from Bumblebee and Cornelius’ sex scene, flashes up title cards reading “To avoid censorship, the act of lovemaking is depicted as follows,” and segues into a tame, black-and-white ballroom dance. Similarly, when Cornelius accidentally sets off a box of seemingly unlimited pyrotechnics, Bergman is sure to inform us that “The fireworks should not be taken symbolically.”

These comedic formal interludes are extensions of Godard’s self-reflexive whimsy, and presage Monty Python by a few years.

There’s no doubt that this is among Bergman’s most formally experimental films to date, and by far his most playful. On a structural level he is often pulling his narrative in non-linear directions, and even chooses to open the film with the final scene of Felix’s funeral. His fate is thus sealed from the start and is seemingly confirmed when an assassination plot is revealed – ludicrously motivated, as it turns out, by Felix’s own desire to be executed for demeaning his art. When the time comes for his big radio concert where Adelaide will pull the trigger though, there is no need for murder. Felix anticlimactically dies of natural causes, leaving his women to mourn and Cornelius to conjecture the rest of his biography alone.

Always hiding Felix’s face through creative shot compositions, right up until his sudden demise. Bergman builds on his mystery even further when the women can’t even agree on a single description of him.

Even in death, this object of everyone’s worship is an obscure, mysterious figure. His face has been conveniently obscured the whole time, leaving a great deal to the imagination when each women sees his dead body and vaguely proclaims “He looks the same, and yet so different.” Perhaps each of them have conceived their own unique ideas of him, as when Cornelius begins reading his biography, none can agree on a single description.

Again, the symmetry and precision of Greenaway many years before his debut – Bergman’s painstaking direction is as rigorous as ever.

Not that it really matters at this point. The arrival of a new cellist in the house immediately soaks up all the love, affection, and attention once reserved for Felix, thereby relegating him to the pages of Cornelius’ history book. That we never really knew a whole lot about the famed musician makes this a particularly smooth transition. In the conceited world of All These Women, men are but faceless idols cycling in and out of fashion, hiding with infatuated fanatics behind facades of highbrow culture. Through Bergman’s irreverent pastiche and mischievous mockery, at least one truth becomes absolutely evident – art has no real relevance to the narcissistic pretensions of artists.

Fourth wall breaks everywhere, acknowledging the artifice of the satire.

All These Women is currently streaming on The Criterion Channel, and is available to rent or buy on iTunes.

Sawdust and Tinsel (1953)

Ingmar Bergman | 1hr 33min

Life is a circus, Ingmar Bergman posits in Sawdust and Tinsel, creating entertainment out of backstage affairs and laughter out of humiliation. It travels long, grey roads from one location to the next, never staying anywhere long enough to grow roots and thrive. It has a strange pull over those trapped in its cycles – the ringleader of this specific troupe, Albert, dreams of leaving it all behind, but realistically this is not something he could ever be satisfied with. When he meets his estranged wife, Agda, who has since settled down and found peace, there is nothing about her stagnant existence that is even slightly appealing to him.

“Year in and year out… everything stands still. For me it’s fulfillment.”

“For me it’s emptiness.”

Therein lies the irreconcilable difference between the nomadic buffoons of Sawdust and Tinsel and the ordinary people they fall for. Albert and his mistress, Anne, will find disappointment wherever they go, but at their very core is a desire for those perpetual distractions which save them from self-pity. In the very first scene as a trail of wagons ascends hills and crosses bridges, Albert joins the coachman to hear the story of how the circus clown, Frost, pathetically tried to cover up his wife as she went swimming in front of nearby soldiers. Bergman renders his flashback through overexposed film, like a bright memory fondly living on in everyone’s minds save for Frost himself. Albert would do well to take the clown’s mistake as a lesson rather than mere entertainment, though given the parallel trajectory that he heads down in Sawdust and Tinsel as a cuckolded man trying to save face, it appears that his embarrassing story may too one day be recounted as a light-hearted joke at his expense.

Over-exposed footage in this initial flashback like a dream, which foreshadows the struggle of sexes that will play out as the film’s main narrative.

Bergman’s wry sense of humour is stronger than ever here, marking a shift in his career away from the troubled romances of youth and towards more philosophically minded dramas with sharp, witty edges. So too does it mark another step forward for him as a visual filmmaker, pairing for the very first time with cinematographer Sven Nykvist who would go on to shoot seventeen more of his films right into the 1980s. In many exterior scenes, and especially that opening montage of wagons trailing across grassy landscapes, the horizon looks as if it has been smothered by a giant grey blanket and pushed right to the bottom of the frame, along with the lowly people who traverse it.

An elegant montage of the traveling circus, its reflection bouncing off calm rivers and rising up over the horizon at sunrise.

As we move indoors, a Wellesian deep focus takes hold of the camera, letting Bergman’s typically excellent blocking emerge in dressing rooms and theatres. It is here where divisions are drawn between characters, both in the layers of visual depth and the cluttered production design, as Frans’ seduction of Anne in his trailer frequently splits them between mirrors in beautifully fragmented compositions. Bergman works wonders with this sort of framing, in one shot catching Frans’ reflection while he stands behind the camera, and having him dangle an amulet right in front of the lens. With a simple image, Anna is tempted away from the life she has grown sick of, and a physical barrier is simultaneously drawn between them. When they are united in this cramped space though, it is of course the mirror which brings them together, inviting an intimacy which she cannot find in her relationship with Albert.

Some impeccable blocking in the mirrors of Frans’ trailer, first dividing them on either side of the frame, and then uniting them in a single reflection.
More division in the blocking, though this time through Bergman’s depth of field splitting Anna and Albert across layers of the frame.

Whether in his personal or professional life, Albert can barely catch a break from anyone, as even when he approaches the local theatre director, Mr Sjuberg, and asks to borrow costumes, he is turned down with a savagely poetic soliloquy. From a low angle, Gunnar Björnstrand stands against an imposing backdrop of the stage’s ornate ceiling and chandelier, drawing a snooty distinction between creators with noble ambitions such as himself, and those like Albert who belong at the bottom of society’s ladder.

“We make art. You make artifice. The lowest of us would spit on the best of you. Why? You only risk your lives. We risk our pride.”

A truly Wellesian low angle, slightly askew and using the deep focus lens to turn the ceiling into an imposing backdrop.

Only an artist with as much self-awareness as Bergman could write a passage so sharply satirical of his own profession. To consider one’s ego as more precious than life is to deem oneself above the material world, and to equally condemn those material beings such as Albert to the “world of misery, lice, and disease” they have always known.

As an actor in Mr Sjuberg’s cast, Frans is just as much an advocate of this classist thinking, topping off his cuckolding of Albert with one final act of sadistic humiliation in the hapless ringleader’s own circus. Starting with a few sexual taunts thrown Anne’s way as she rides a horse around the tent, Albert quicky gets involved too, whipping off Frans’ hat in a show of petty power. It is a brutal, bloody brawl that follows – a struggle of masculine dominance which simply ends up asserting the same rigid hierarchy which makes Albert, Anne, and their troupe the butt of society’s joke.

Albert’s humiliation rendered as circus entertainment, building on Bergman’s potent metaphor of life.
Bergman’s blocking of faces in close-up is among the best in the artform’s history – a lot of this has to do with the lighting, the depth of field, and of course, the actors.

There is nothing but a sorrowful look shared between these two lovers before it is time for them to move on again, riding across monochrome landscapes with the rest of their misfit crew in much the same way they came in. Life’s tragicomic farce continues, undercutting dreams of escaping its stranglehold with constant reminders of their own inadequacy. If there is any solace, at least those embarrassing stories will make for great comic fodder down the track, offering momentary distractions from their sad, squalid circumstances. Bergman needles the existential drama of Sawdust and Tinsel with a fine, sophisticated point, and in his extraordinary staging finds both sympathy and outright pity for its wayfaring circus performers doomed to eternal ridicule.

Sawdust and Tinsel is currently streaming on The Criterion Channel, and is available to rent or buy on iTunes.