Abraham meets Lumière in "Footnote"

Eliezer Shkolnik’s life is turned upside down when his life-long research of an ancient Talmudic manuscript is proven worthless by one of his rival scholars. As if that was not enough, his son is about to receive the Israel Prize, the most prestigious recognition in Israel which Eliezer aspired to all his life. But to give his bitter story a comedic twist, a newspaper that announces the winners of the Israel Prize mistakes Eliezer for his son and leads him to believe that his scholarly efforts will finally be appreciated after all.

The story of Footnote parallels with the symbolism of the Talmudic teachings, accenting on certain aspects of morality concerned with an act of sacrifice. We see Eliezer as a committed scholar who spends his days on a thorough dissertation of the Talmudic texts, making his world revolve around the grim interiors of the library at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. But as he deepens into his work he grows more and more detached from his family, turning into a neglectful husband and a jealous father. He is a purist who strongly believes in the purpose of his work and undermines everyone who tends to take a different approach to the ancient texts he studies – including his son.

Uriel discovers that his father meets a strange woman during the days he spends at the University. The cloud of mystery surrounding these meetings suggests that we will not be able to have a clear outlook on the character and therefore we are unfit to make any judgement about his sense of morality. The director of the film chooses to remain playful throughout instead of giving us definite answers. But his playfulness doesn’t stop at creating a dynamic story; he conceives an amalgamation between the aesthetic approaches used in literature and those used in crafting a cinematic experience. We see several ‘footnotes’ flashing on the screen, whenever the director diversifies the main plot by providing some background to each character’s story. The dichotomy between the two main characters, one representing science and facts (Eliezer) and the other representing fiction and interpretation (Ulrik) is a feature that brings to focus the film’s main strength – its cultural inter-textuality.

The father-son relationship and its complexities are what drives the narrative of Talmud and inspires a plethora of Judaic traditions and rituals. The director dwells on these complexities and in the process of telling the story of Footnote the director exposes his own intimate relationship with the subject. As far as the film goes I wish there was a bit more intimacy built between the characters and the audience. Cedar puts too much attention on the cerebral entanglements of the story omitting the emotional side of each character. Even though the covenant to which Cedar engages his audience isn’t necessarily of Abrahamic proportions, the film has enough stamina to make it worthwhile. 

The Ides of Mr Clooney

One might wish that more on-screen time was given to Paul Giamatti and Phillip Seymour Hoffman in The Ides of March – the latest flick brought to us by the Hollywood mogul Gorge Clooney. Knowing how much potential the film has with the quad of male leads it is a little disappointing that the story focuses almost exclusively on the Clooney-Gosling duo. But that’s the consequence of following almost word by word the play Farragut North on which the screenplay to The Ides was based. 

Truth be told, the film is enjoyable through most of its duration, mostly because of its nicely done editing and clear, yet conventional aesthetics. There is unfortunately less excitement in the storyline department. The first half of the film feels like one long sequence taken out of an HBO drama. It has some very promising stylistic features and as it moves at its considerably slow pace, it feels as if it may have been building up to something grand. But for a feature film which The Ides of March is, the flick runs out of steam pretty quickly. In addition to that, the twist which drives the second half of the narrative is both predictable and underwhelming.

I was reminded of Woody Allen’s Crimes and Misdemeanours as the film was heading towards its climax. An affair with a young woman and its moral as well as pragmatic consequences is the driving force for both films. But while Woody Allen shapes his storyline attempting to find out what is the purpose of guilt in our lives, Clooney stops at asking a faint and clichéd, “are human beings moral?” Stephen Meyers (Gosling) compromises his integrity for a career in politics, while Governor Mike Morris (Clooney) reinforces his unethical act of adultery by making unscrupulous arrangements with  Meyers. The matter of guilt does not even enter the universe in which Meyers and Morris rival their male egos, and perhaps the lack of that aspect of consciousness in both men’s thinking is the director’s way of bluntly stating that politics is a game only for those who are able to silence their consciousness. But if so, the film falls into its own intellectual trap, as for anyone who has even the slightest idea about the world in general, such an assumption about politics is a no-brainer. 

Even if we are to speak strictly about The Ides’ relevance to other films, we are to discover  that the same theme was discussed in almost all political dramas, beginning with the all-time classic Mr Smith Goes to Washington, ending with Good Night and Good Luck, or more recently, Lions for Lambs.

The last scene of the film in which Stephen Meyers is about to give an interview, leaves us with the man staring directly into the camera. The mechanism of an open ending has its use in a variety of genres, but in case of The Ides of March feels completely out of place. It seems to be regarded as a mysterious and exciting way to finish the film, assuming that the audience will wonder over the meaning of that last glance. Instead, the ending feels rushed and inconclusive, as if Clooney did not quite know what else to add. Interestingly enough Clooney might have proven something that he did not intend – that films themselves are very much like politicians. With its amount of Golden Globes’ nominations and the potential success at the Oscars, one can only compare The Ides of March to Clooney’s character, Governor Morris. Similarly to Governor’s political campaign, the film’s true tour de force is its marketing promotion. Will it be enough to grant Mr Clooney the grand prize?