| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
BaftaBaby 
"Always entranced by cinema."
|
 Posted - 05/10/2007 : 22:42:44
|
Milos Forman's meandering film keeps slipping away as unaccountably as the ghosts of its title. You'd be forgiven for thinking it was based on a novel, because it takes many structural liberties with what should be a much tauter cinematic structure. And, though the astonishing Spanish painter Francisco Goya keeps popping up, neither the story nor the ghosts are his.
Goya's remarkable body of work brought to canvas images of both polish and degradation characteristic of late 18th/early 19th century Spain, whose atmosphere of fear in the face of the Inquisition [being put to The Question] engendered pockets of defiance that led to full blown rebellion. The role of the Church in trying to maintain social control by its reign of terror is what really interests Forman. Goya, sadly, becomes merely the catalyst which propels the story forward.
The tale is simple: In�s, a rich merchant's daughter -- who, like many aristocratic families including the Spanish Royals, is having her portrait painted by Goya -- is seen enjoying herself at a local tavern with friends. The eyes that catch her refusing to eat some suckling pig belong to one of the insidious religious spies roaming the town on the look out for anything that might offend Church doctrine. These vigilantes have been exhorted by Lorenzo, an eloquent monk to leave no stone unturned in exposing the slightest degree of sin.
The girl is taken from her family and flung into jail on the grounds that she's a secret Jew; the fact that she didn't want to eat pork because she doesn't like the taste cuts no ice with Father Gregrio and the council of fanatics who run the Inquisition. She's "put to The Question" in a scene of torture which would have anyone confessing to be the bastard child of apes just to stop the pain.
And, coincidentally, that's just The Question to which the accusatory Monk is "put" by the girl's father. The Monk, having been so sure that God will help him resist such a bizare confession beforehand, doesn't take long to crack and to sign a paper affirming his so-called anthopoid parentage. The fact that Goya has brokered this meeting - without a clue as to what the desperate father had in mind - and the fact that the Monk has also been sitting for a portrait by the great man are plot contrivances. Goya is never a protagonist in the film, though you keep expecting he might do more than just happen to be here or there at some convenient time.
Because the script doggedly pursues its own story, rather than that of the artist -- whose own life, incidentally was pretty packed with drama -- Forman produces a film which looks gorgeous and is brilliantly shot but one which has no focus. And that's almost sacrilege, since Goya's paintings are so meticulously composed and always have a focal point.
Neither the complexity of the man as political chronicler nor of the painter as empathizer is even remotely dealt with here, and that's a shame. Forman might just have got away with it if the film moved with a sense of purpose, or chose a character to shape the story. Any of the three main roles [Goya, In�s, or Lorenzo] would do, but we jump from one to the other, catching them in glimpses. If this was a deliberate attempt to make some comment on the way a painting catches but a moment yet implies a lifetime ... it just doesn't work.
The acting is uneven, not merely because it's a hodge-podge of nationalities all trying to capture some Spanish essence. Two of the three leads are excellent - Stellan Skarsg�rd as Goya and Natalie Portman in two roles. Javier Bardem as Brother Lorenzo, the Monk of false humility and brutal pride tries too hard. Clearly he's capable of a more subtle performance, and indeed there are moments that prove it, but I suspect Forman's pushed him into a more palpable villainly that tips into melodrama.
Skarsg�rd's role is underwritten, but the canny Swede who's gained an international reputation, invests it with such a wealth of detail that he's a joy to watch. Unfortunately it only serves to remind us of the flaws in the structure; we keep wanting to see him play a more active role than the predictable "artist as recorder." Portman, though, is given a far richer canvas and she inhabits it with skill and conviction. Her journey from spoiled little rich girl to broken woman is extremely moving, and she creates an entirely different girl in her supplementary role.
My advice is ... if you've got a couple of hours to spend indoors looking at images, find a museum that has some Goya's and sit in front of them.
|
|
|
Salopian 
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 05/11/2007 : 13:14:51
|
| Yup, it's an odd one. It doesn't really feel like a film. In the earlier section, I thought it was going to be a real drag, although it did pick up. I agree that Portman is excellent, although I found Skarsg�rd and Bardem about the same. The story is rather cliched in a Dickensian way (not that this sort of thing was so cliched at the time that Dickens did it), although I'm enough of a sap for it to engage me. This part of me would have preferred the expected culmination of the story, so at least it avoided giving us that easy ending. |
 |
|
|
randall
"I like to watch."
|
Posted - 08/26/2007 : 00:54:07
|
| We saw a pre-release screening at the Goog, with Mr. Forman in attendance at a q&a, then a reception in the main atrium at which he was quite approachable. He was unutterably charming, but unable in our minds to successfully defend this work. |
Edited by - randall on 08/26/2007 00:54:45 |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Goya's Ghosts - some spoilers
