|
Since films like “The Constant Gardener” and
“Traffic” have set a precedent for big budget Oscar contenders with a
commentary on society, “Babel” is one of the many to enter the film
community with a rather timely commentary. If anything, “Babel” should
make for some interesting debating once the film has ended, and will
surely enter into the Oscars eventually. Iñárritu’s film revolves around
alienation and communication, and alienation not only through
immigration, but through the differences that alienate us from everyone
around us, even to people similar in nationality. Take for example
Chieko who is a deaf-mute still grieving her mother’s suicide and seeks
to be accepted in her country among her friends.
|
She does this through her
inappropriate and utterly obscene sexual come-ons to many
men of the opposite sex. Rinko Kikuchi gives a great
performance as a girl who wants sexual acceptance aside from
social acceptance. She watches people talking, and dances at
a party where she can hear no music and has no idea how to
live among others when the only person who accepted her has
died.
She and her father do not
communicate well, but are essentially alienated from their
inner circle and only have each other to turn to. |
|
 |
“Babel” grabs you emotionally and doesn’t ease up until the
surprising climax where Iñárritu not only conveys his message, but
reveals how we can be connected, yet so disjointed in a time where
we’re even closer than we realize.
One
incident affects the other, and so on, and this reveals the theme of
the Butterfly effect. One small mistake can create a domino effect
and this happens through a single misfire. Through this we’re drawn
into the most engrossing sub-plot, two brothers in Morocco
competing, are sold a rifle, and through a misguided attempt at
rivalry shoot at an oncoming bus. This then reflects on Susan who is
shot. The scene where Blanchett is shot is not played for shock, yet
it’s still a rather effective scene as she awakes with a horrible
gunshot wound. She’s hours away from a hospital and instead is taken
into a local village, where her husband Richard struggles to keep
her alive, and begs for help from his embassy who can not help due
to political issues with terrorism.
He has to set aside his prejudices and
pre-conceived notions about the country to save the life of his
wife, in spite of the insistence from passengers begging to go home
and threatening to leave him behind. Even though Brad Pitt gets all
the face time, the best performance isn’t from him, it’s from the
small family of goat herders who are immediately deemed terrorists.
The plot continues to unfold through actions involving border
police, and a complex puzzle of individuals lost in their own world
without any hope. Iñárritu’s film is a compelling piece of
filmmaking with excellent performances, and verification that one
small incident can change our lives and connect us closer than we
realize. “Babel” may not be a masterpiece, but it kept me glued to
my seat.
Iñárritu’s and the studios are obviously vying for an Oscar
with this one, and the derivation from success ensemble pictures like
“Crash” and “Traffic” become too obvious all too often. “Babel”
basically
follows the conventions of previous societal commentary films. Told out
of sequence, separate stories, fate intervenes, shot in a gritty style,
void of any such sentimentality, etc. It seems awfully intent on
garnering Oscars and various awards that you can sense it was almost a
note on the screenplay. Meanwhile, not all the sub-plots are
provocative, or compelling. The storyline in Mexico was not only
predictable, but blatantly gauging the audiences emotions and anxiously
pressed the immigration issue ad nauseum. "Babel" presses its luck, and
is never as subversive as it can be.
Iñárritu’s film may be Oscar bait, and
utterly manipulative with meandering storylines, but it still ends up
being a very good piece of filmmaking that's worth the audience. An
ensemble cast, low-key drama, and tolerable political commentary make
“Babel” a gripping success.
|
