Thursday 22 March 2018

Film: 'Mary Magdalene'

My enthus-iasm for seeing this was near rock bottom anyway, but coming up from having been laid low for a few days by a flu-like virus, and having for that reason missed (possibly forever) the chance of seeing two films that were on my list - 'A Fantastic Woman' and 'Bombshell: The Hedy Lamarr Story' - thought I'd better make some effort to get back into the routine, even if it is with something that has attracted majority reviews of being flat and uninspiring. Two things that would have made me want to walk out are, on the soundtrack a celestial choir wafting their 'Ah-aahs' at every point of heightened religious experience  - so much a fixture of religious (= Christian) films in decades gone by (not in this film, though there is much devotionally-pointed high strings music) - and another is an exceptionally gruesome crucifixion depiction which hyper-zealot Mel Gibson has demonstrated can be done - and Pope John Paul II, after watching his film, 'The Passion of the Christ', declared that that was just how it happened - and he would have known, wouldn't he? No, my own imagination can supply gore and gristle enough, thank you, without having to endure it in graphic representation. In this film the crucifixion scene and those leading up to it, though necessarily bloody, are brief.

The interesting take on this film is its awesome and well-intentioned attempt to rehabilitate this key character of the Gospels (if indeed she was just one individual rather than being a composite) by freeing her from the erroneous caricature of 'fallen woman' bestowed upon her by Pope Gregory I (the 'Great') and which has endured now for over fourteen centuries - though with a very long overdue attempt by the Vatican in recent years to rectify this slanderous injustice. (Btw: Why are men never described as being 'fallen'? Is it something that only they are permitted to be without censure? - permitted by other men, of course.) 
The film attempts to show some happenings of Christ's late life from a feminine perspective where the experiences of the two of them coincide. And it's Mary who, quite rightly, has the greater screen time.

Joachin Phoenix is the Messiah! - looking nearer to 40 than his reputed age of early 30s, so Jesus hasn't aged too well, but we'll let that go.  Rooney Mara is Mary M., his sole female disciple and favourite (and his wife? - but no indication of that in this film!)
Chiwetel Ejiofor is a disappointingly anodyne Peter, about as bland as I actually found Mara in the title role - and indeed, Phoenix himself, who didn't seem right for this historically stand-out part. To my mind there ought to have been rather more magnetism, both animal and spiritual, to this 'saviour'. 
The only really interesting member of the cast I thought was the screen-stealing Tahar Rahim as a bubbly, very likeable Judas, impatient for the arrival of a heavenly power to overthrow the oppressive Romans rulers.

The story begins with Mary living with her 'demons' which are then cast out by Jesus in their first meeting. Thereafter there didn't seem to be that much attraction between the two even though it's played that there was indeed an emotional connection. 
Much dialogue in this film, particularly in the early scenes, is lost in incoherent mumblings and incomprehensible whisperings, when such low-voiced exchanges weren't even necessary! So that got it off on the wrong foot for me.
A few episodes we are familiar with are played out - a raising from the dead of a man (not Lazarus) - was particularly well done. 
I liked that we were shown Mary actually baptising others herself - okay, 'just' two women but even so.....something that would alone get some 'evangelists' frothing at the mouth, so that's all to the good.
The reason for the betrayal by Judas is given a different slant to the one that's been handed down to us, so that too I liked.  

In a sense this is a brave film, attempting to give us something new without lurching over completely into controversial territory, so that alone is a 'plus'. But other than this rather abstract pleasing quality I'd be hard-pushed to detail many more of its assets. 

Director Garth Davis gave us the quite impressive 'Lion' in 2016. If this film is, in my view, nowhere near that it in stature and quality,  this did exceed my original low expectations.............5.



14 comments:

  1. Good news that you were feeling well enough to make a journey to the cinema. Bad that you missed "A Fantastic Woman" because it was fantastic and worthy of the award it received. Hope that it come around again in your area. On "Mary M........", I think I'll skip.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I really regret having missed 'Fant W', Paul, but I'll certainly keep an eye out for its return - if!

      I fear 'Mary M' is going to be one of those forgettable films when it needn't have been. The idea was sound enough. I think much of the problem lay in the casting.

      Delete
  2. I hate religious movies
    But I am glad you are feeling better raymondo

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, JayGee. I'm 'better' but not even nearly there yet - but I'm trying!

      Delete
  3. I was hoping to see this but appear to have missed it here as there are no further showings advertised. I read that the film was pretty much non controversial and would not upset any religious observers which put me off a bit, I would rather it had been! Mary Magdalene is believed now to have been a prostitute. I may yet get to see it if it gets more showings here. Thanks Ray. Glad you are feeling better and back blogging.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There are things in it which will definitely concern, even rile, some of those with a religious persuasion, Rachel - I speak of those who will not give an inch against what they've believed as t'rue' for all their lives - and this film deserves some credit for daring to suggest just that. For example Mary M. actually participating in the Last Supper on an equal or even superior level to the other apostles. So there may yet be this and other things in it which would please you. As for all films, I would not recommend that you MISS this one - though alas for me it didn't come quite up to the challenge it had set itself. Definitely not bad, though.

      As for my well-being, thanks - but I'm still climbing up that thar hill, and a little way yet to go to the summit.

      Delete
  4. Ray,
    I would have low expectations of this film too. Not sure if I want to see yet another graphic torture scene. What's up with that anyway? And the mumbling dialogue. I've been known to eject the disc when the mumbling exceeds a certain level. Nicole Kidman is notorious for mumbling. Someone should tell the actors that mumbling isn't acting, it's mumbling.
    Ron

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think it's a film one needs a reason to see beforehand, Ron. It won't do much for anyone who is dead set against that 'kind' of film (i.e. religious themed) anyway - and its 'rewards' such as they are, are diminished by the bad acting choices as well, of course, as all that garbled dialogue, which is so disrepectful towards the audience. So for you it's a case of keeping your distance.

      Btw: You already know how much I DO like Ms Kidman. If she is a 'mumbler', which I hadn't particularly noticed, she's nowhere near the worst.

      Delete
  5. Sorry to hear you have been ill. I would like to see this film, if only because of the subject. I watched the DVD of La La Land, dont shoot me, but it is utter tosh to me. I would give it a 1 or 2. How it got all those awards I dont know.I am glad we didnt got to the cinema to see it, it would have cost us a fortune and would have been rubbish. I just didnt get it at all.

    I hope the weather has been good there this weekend. We have had perfect blue skies. I walked the dogs on the beach with only a thin cardigan. 14 oC.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There's a lot of it around, Sol, this mysterious flu-like virus that isn't quite the flu. Better now but I hear it can come back, so not doing cartwheels yet. Having had the stuffing knocked out of me on its first visit what I need is a good pick-me-up - and another viewing of 'La La land' would just do the trick! ;-

      Weather here on south coast has been iffy but showing a bit of promise. Wish it would get a move on and dive right into some genuine warmth.

      Delete
    2. And I know this wont be up your street, but I also saw the dystopian film The Scorch Trials, which is the 2nd installment of the Maze Runner. I give this a good 6. I would watch it again
      anytime (we have it on DVD). I dont know if you watch it or even have a TV, but I am loving the next series of the Durrells set in Greece and also The Good Karma Hospital. Both lovely sunday night feel good tv. It is cold here today and the sky is white. although we have not be forecast bad weather as yet.

      Delete
    3. I saw the first 'Maze Runner', Sol, and actually thought that it wasn't at all that bad, really - but I think Part II has been and gone by now. If it's still around I'll remember what you said.

      I did give the Durells a go when you first mentioned it a couple months or more ago but I couldn't stick with it. When switching channels around last night I noticed it was back on again but after a few mins the former ennui set in once more.
      'Good Karma Hospital' doesn't rock my boat either - same company who did 'Best Marigold Hotel'? Oh dear. Too much!

      A Spring-like day today but I believe it's getting colder once more later this week - though not quite THAT cold again, thank Heavens!

      Delete
  6. I had no idea there was a film out based on MM. I remember reading a book on her; the poor dear has been given many roles over the centuries none of which are 'bible-based'. it seems every generation gets/makes the MM they want or need.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. One of so many enigmatic Biblical figures, Dr Spo - very many. There was scope here to have done something with her character that was a really imaginative shake-up but instead it turns out all rather lacklustre - afraid of frightening the horses to a large extent, I reckon.

      Delete