Academy Awards

I was pleased that "The Hurt Locker" beat out "Avatar" in the major awards. I watched the ceremony with a group of friends, one of whom was clearly annoyed that "Avatar" wasn't recognized. She asked me what I liked about "The Hurt Locker." She had seen the film but said she didn't feel that she learned anything from it and didn't find it thought-provoking. Putting my thoughts into words to explain was challenging. Apart, of course, from the fact that (as my husband said) "'Hurt Locker' had actual actors and acting..." what makes it a great film is how well all the component parts work together: acting, writing, cinematography. In particular, I think the film presents great character studies. The two main characters, Sanborn and James, are polar opposites, and the tension between them adds to the conflict that drives the movie. Orbiting those two strong personalities is the younger soldier, who is a bit fragile, who is trying to figure out how to get through the terrible experience of the war and who looks to the two older men for models of how to survive.

The thing I liked least about the movie was the quotation at the beginning about war being a drug. I didn't find it necessary to hit the audience over the head with this observation, as the theme becomes clear through the action in the movie. The quotation violates the "show, don't tell" rule of storytelling.

Movie: "Four Months, Three Weeks and Two Days" (2007)

"Four Months, Three Weeks and Two Days," a 2007 Romanian film, is one of the best movies I've seen in a while. I knew the premise going in, but trying to see the movie from the perspective of someone who didn't, the filmmaker reveals the story in a subtle way. He shows you things, and you gradually put the pieces together. He trusts in the viewer's perception.

[SPOILER ALERT] The opening scene shows two young women, Gabita and Otilia, in a dorm room in Bucharest in 1987. They seem to be preparing to go on a vacation. Gabita is waxing her legs. Otilia is always on the move, taking care of things, buying soap and cigarettes, borrowing money. Otilia is practical, a fixer, a scrappy survivor. What makes this movie so effective is the way it subverts your expectations. Once the viewer understands that the movie is about the efforts to obtain an illegal abortion, you assume that the film will center on the character of Gabita, who needs the abortion. But the film is really about her best friend Otilia, and how the events of this day affect her.

So many great details in this movie: the realization that Gabita was waxing her legs for the abortionist! Otilia's apple green sweater, the only splash of color in the movie. The city itself is only shades of gray and beige. The character of the abortionist: by turns amusing, bureaucratic, brutal, manipulative, avuncular, terrifying.

The director shoots the film largely at eye level with the characters, placing the viewer in the movie. This is particularly effective during the dinner party at Otilia's boyfriend's apartment. The camera occupies a seat at the dinner table and is a witness to all the emotions that pass across Otilia's face. She has just gone through a terrible trauma (she ends up having to make a horrible sacrifice to enable Gabita to get the abortion), and now she has to endure the company of her boyfriend's parent's friends, who lead easy lives, connected as they are to the communist party, and who patronize her on the basis of class (the very thing that communism was supposed to eliminate, right?). Great filmmaking. Available on Netflix.