A MATTER OF LIFE, DEATH AND "A VERY LONG ENGAGEMENT"

I know we did say that the theme of this week was death. And yet, I hear you cry, this is a romance! What the blazes is it doing here? Well, I reckon it fits. First of all, a lot of it is set during the First World War, in the trenches. And honestly, history teaches us that it doesn’t get much more death filled than that. But apart from that, this is the story of Mathilde, who refuses to believe that her fiancée is dead – even though there are multiple clues to the contrary. So it kind of fits. Death is constantly present, hovering over us, even though the theme of the film is love. Does it prevail or not, however? Ha ha. As if I’d tell you… =) For Mathilde and Manech it has been true love from the very start. Since they were children. So when the authorities come to fetch him away to go to the Somme in 1917, it is truly heart-wrenching but they know their love is strong and will keep them going over distances and difficulties. Come 1919, Manech has not returned. Official reports make it quite clear he is dead. Soldiers claim to have witnessed his death – or something pretty close at any rate – as he was left to die with four other men in no man’s land for self-inflicted wounds. Mathilde, however, knows otherwise. She and Manech are connected. If he were dead, she would know. Thus starts an amazing journey, searching for the truth. Mathilde seems to be seeking to overcome death itself but the question is, is she simply being overly hopeful? Or is her heart actually leading her to a truly amazing truth? This film is another brilliant example of the story, the director and the actress fitting together almost perfectly. Audrey Tatou, who a few years before the film had carved out a bit of immortality for herself as Amelie is extraordinary. The role suits her very well, as she needs to be a bit “extraordinary” like Amelie, yet Tatou manages very well to combine this quality with a more serious note that is demanded by the film. In this 20th century fairy tale, she is a very realistic and very believable, sympathetic character. As for Jean-Pierre Jeunet, the director, I am well on the way to becoming one of his greatest fans. What I admire him for most is his ability to give a fairy-tale / other-worldly feel to every single set he touches. And he makes it work. It is the same quality but slightly different every time, and in my book it is this ability to keep the basic quality while adapting ever so slightly to fit the situation that makes an artist great and Jeunet (and Tatou incidentally) have this quality by the bucket-load. We are all told how impossible to imagine the horrors of trench warfare are. I think this is exactly why Jeunet is such a good choice as the director of this film. He is able, I would say, to convey the “unrealness” of it all without falling into melodrama or clichés. The trenches he creates, the story he tells are so horrible they are actually completely believable. And probably, though very few people alive today would know for sure, quite close to what actually happened. In the same way, the love between Mathilde and Manech is so extraordinary it is quite believable. After all, falling in love is one of the most unbelievable things possible. And this is possibly why it is so hard to find really good quality love films that are not “gooey” or clichés. This, I am glad to say, is one of them. P.S. I had spotted the odd celebrity face here and there throughout the film but it was only when I was preparing to publish this and saw the whole list "en masse" as it were that I realised how monumental the cast actually was. See how many of them you can spot, some of them are just side characters :)

OK, THE LAST ONE, FOR NOW : "ALIEN: RESURRECTION"

Like I said, this one was touch and go for me at first. I mean logically. I don’t want to give too much away about the third one in case you haven’t quite got round to it yet but… Hang on a minute. I’m not going to be able to say a thing about this film unless I give that away. Err… Ok this is awkward but seeing as I’m one of a mere handful of people who hasn’t watched this thing yet, and seeing that, well, we are so far evolved in our taste in films that, honestly, you don’t mind a tiny spoiler, right? I mean, it’s on the back of the Alien 4 DVD for God’s sake. Ok I’ll cut to the chase. So. You may (or may not) recall that at the end of Alien3 , Ripley had found out that she had a Queen alien embedded in her chest and had killed herself to save the human race. At this point, especially with big words like “Resurrection” being thrown about I had my doubt as to how realistic / good the film was going to be. But, and I may have mentioned this, the film had one redeeming feature in my eyes in the form of director Jean –Pierre Jeunet. The man is a little mad as far as I’m concerned (and anyone who doubts it should watch masterpieces like Delicatessen and Cite des Enfants Perdus) but this is a good thing in this particular case. I personally love the man’s style and thought that this alone was a recommendation for the film. Plus of course, this was the third “sequel” after all, if thing got a little doodah here and there, frankly, who could blame them? Wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong. The film is brilliant. The resurrection is totally justified. And Jeunet works brilliantly with the entire combination. Allow me to explain. It is 200 years later. Technology has advanced tremendously even since Ripley’s time. And even though the aliens seem to be abandoned to the dusty vaults of history, there are still determined men and women out there who want to get their greedy paws on the aliens to use them as the ultimate weapon. In the end, a long series of experiments finally have a result: Ripley is cloned, using blood samples she gave while she was alive. And she is cloned with the Alien Queen inside of her. Now, the Queen is surgically removed and set to the task of breeding “warriors” but then there is the matter of Ripley. She is, thanks to her new genetic coding, a alien – human hybrid who, having been born in her early to mid-thirties is finding the world a slightly challenging place. Add onto this the crew of bounty hunters that have just come on board ship for shady business and already we have an interesting concoction. And as we all know only too well by now, if there are aliens in the mix, things are pretty much bound to get deadly… The film does something very, very intelligent here. They take something that could have been just used to “bring Ripley back” and glossed over and make it into a serious commentary. There is quite a serious, thought-provoking section on cloning in the film. I assume the date coincides with first arguments on the topic, but of course the arguments are just as relevant today. The other good thing is, the “argument” is not presented via long and somewhat stilted dialogue, but mainly through visuals and events, ergo it is emotionally engaging as opposed to being long, erudite words that have kinda been said before. There are, naturally, the pre-requisite chases through corridors and grizzly deaths but the whole thing carries the clear mark of Jeunet’s original style and quality so they are, all in all, a pleasure to watch. Plus, there are a few serious surprises in store. I mean one in particular made me go “Oh God, why didn’t I think of that!!” – out loud. It’s so obvious and yet so well-hidden. I did also spot a few comments on religion and its place in society, but that is possibly the topic of a longer, more serious write-up / essay (for those who aren’t sure what I’m talking about, surely you noticed that the omnipresent main computer in the spaceship is called “Father”?). I don’t necessarily agree with what the film is saying about religion, but I just wanted to point it out, if only to prove that Alien is really, really not like “any old” sci-fi movie. As someone who has actually studied film, it is my personal opinion that it merits multiple-viewings and serious consideration. And I mean, it’s a riot to watch, even if you watch it just the once… 