丨This article was first published in the Pippi movie
Pippi Movies / A great movie recommendation every day
When we think of Iranian films, we always think of images of children.
For example, the brother and sister in Majid Majidi's "Little Shoes" who exchange a pair of shoes back and forth.
For example, Vincent Parland's "I Grew Up in Iran" is the teenage girl Who grew up in the turmoil of Iranian society.
For example, in Abbas's "Where Is My Friend's Home", the one who crossed the mountains and found the night from day to night, just to return the wrong homework book to the little boy Raza at the same table.
One children's classic after another makes people look at Iranian movies, but The Iranian people's preference for "children's themes" is actually a last resort.
Iran is a theocratic state, and film is subject to multiple influences and constraints of the canon.
As a result, Iranian films that originated in 1925 have always developed slowly, and the subject matter has always been unable to let go, and the phrase we often say "dancing with shackles" is also an appropriate description of the state of Iranian cinema.
In order to express opinions more gently without violating the moral taboos of the canon, films with "children's themes" and children's perspectives have become the best vehicles for many directors to create.
The above mentioned films are like this, and the following film is also like this, through the perspective of children to face a series of sensitive issues in Iran, such as social class contradictions, such as women's issues, and the unique canonical background and realistic expression under its story are called the uncompromising scale of Iran.
"A Parting" 丨 2011
The director is Asha Farhati, a famous Iranian director who is also the screenwriter of this work.
"A Parting" is also Farhati's fifth feature film, although it cost only $300,000, but won 25 international awards such as the Golden Bear award at the 61st Berlin Film Festival and the 84th O'Oscar for Best Foreign Language Film.
It is worth mentioning that in the journey of competing for the Oscar for best foreign language film that year, "A Parting" also defeated the film directed by Zhang Yimou - "Jinling Thirteen Chao", which invested more than 600 million yuan.
The film begins with a scene in a small courtroom, and in just a few minutes, it is very interesting.
From the perspective of an unincorporated mediator, we witness a middle-class couple stating their reasons for filing for divorce.
His wife, Westminster, wanted to immigrate to the West with her daughter Teme, and was granted a visa, and had to leave within forty days, saying, in her words, "I don't want my children to grow up in this environment." ”
Then the mediator asked, "What kind of environment?" ”
Westminster did not speak and remained silent.
Obviously, the mediator asked this question not only to Westminster, but also to the audience, especially in that country.
The answer is self-explanatory, but the director still uses a blank streak here, omitting positive statements about sensitive topics such as Iran's political turmoil and the nuclear crisis.
Of course, such a script is designed on the one hand to avoid censorship, and on the other hand, it also shows that a well-educated middle-class family who wants to leave Iran is something that does not require any reason or explanation. (For example, Marga in "I Grew Up in Iran" was sent to Austria by her parents at the age of 14.) ）
The husband Nader naturally understood his wife's concerns, but he was reluctant to emigrate because his father had Alzheimer's disease and needed his care.
On the one hand, the wife's love for her daughter, on the other hand, the husband's love for her father, but unfortunately, the two kinds of love cannot be fulfilled at the same time, and it will only be a waste of time to mediate.
But from the long shot at the beginning of the film, we can still tell that neither Westminster nor Nader is a bad person.
Westminster emigrated in order to give his children a better education, and Nader refused to emigrate so that he could accompany his father rather than pretend to be a man, and both had legitimate reasons.
The emotional complexity of the film begins here.
After unsuccessful mediation, the two chose to separate, Westminster moved back to his parents' house, and Teme chose to live with his father and grandfather.
In order to keep his father on the lookout for him at work, Nader hired a nanny, Reitz.
Reitz is a devout, lower-class woman who is forced to live and brings her young daughter Sommaya to work every time.
Moreover, Reitz still has a big belly, and she is hiding from her husband to work. The family owed a lot of money, and her husband was unemployed, so she had to do it.
The problem arose the day after Reitz went to work—Nader's father would wet his pants.
In the canon law of Iran, a woman is only allowed to wash her body for her husband and son. If Reitz had helped Nadard's father wash it, there was a good chance she would have broken the ban.
Nervous and entangled, Reitz called the canon hotline and asked her if it was a sin to help this man. After receiving a no's answer, Reitz put his mind at ease to help Nader's father wash and change clothes.
When Nader came home, Reitz asked him, "Why didn't you tell me earlier that your father would be incontinent?" ”
Upon hearing this question, Nader was so surprised that he quickly said that he did not know that he had always thought that his father could go to the toilet by himself.
So what's the problem?
Did his father happen to wait until this time?
No.
Westminster was the one who had been quietly taking care of Nader's father and had been risking his ban to help him wash his body and change his clothes. It also explains why Nader's father, who had almost lost the ability to speak, kept muttering Westminster's name.
Only when Westminster leaves the house will Nader know the truth and know that his wife is not easy.
Life did not return to calm after this little incident, but wave after wave of unevenness.
One day, Nader returned home from work early and found his father lying on the floor, delirious, with one hand tied to the bed, nearly dying.
It turned out that the pregnant Reitz left the old man to run his own business.
At this point, the plot takes a sharp turn.
Nader was furious, reprimanding her for leaving her father alone at home, saying that she had stolen money, and saying that Reitz would never use it again.
Reitz did not refute the fact that he left his post without permission. But the moment she heard Nader say she stole the money, emotions began to stir and she insisted on demanding her own day's salary. Because this is the proceeds of her labor, if she does not want a wage, it shows that she is weak-minded.
For Reitz, money is important, but dignity is even more important. Wages are required.
Reitz swore in the name of Imam Hussein that he had not stolen the money, but Nader grabbed her black robe and pushed her out the door.
Later, when Nader washed his father's body, he began to lie on his father's back and cry.
As for why he was crying, perhaps only Nader himself understood, but it also seemed to indicate that something big was about to happen.
Sure enough, the next day, Westminster told Nader that Reitz had miscarried because of that push.
From here, the two families went to court.
Nader insisted he didn't know Reitz was pregnant and only pushed her to get her out of his house. At the same time, he also said that because Reitz left without permission to tie the old man to the bed alone, almost causing his death, he was emotionally pushed.
If Nader knew Reitz was pregnant and pushed her, he would have been in prison for one to three years.
Reitz also faces Nader's accusations, and the prison sentence is imminent.
Perhaps we will guess who is telling the truth, but the truth is that both people are lying.
Nader lied, he knew Reitz was pregnant, and pushed her because he was dizzy. If he really goes to jail, what will happen to the father and what will happen to the daughter, he can only bite to death and not admit it.
Reitz also lied that her miscarriage was not caused by Nader, but that Reitz himself was hit by a car the day before when Nader's father sneaked out of the house, so as not to let him get hit by a car on the road.
From that moment on, the fetus was no longer moving.
At this point, the matter could not be clearer, and the two people in the dispute knew the truth, but they did not dare to tell the truth.
The development of the story is so wonderful, there is no fierce struggle between good people and bad people, there are just good people under the shackles of various reasons, against each other's will.
And through the self-division of individuals, the division of the class level of Iranian society is also known.
Although "A Parting" does not deliberately criticize, from the film lens, character modeling, dialogue and other film languages, we can deeply feel the "Iranian reality" such as polarization and social injustice in Iran's "divided" society.
In describing this part, the film once again borrows the child's perspective to "trace the source".
In the film, when Teme studied Iranian history with her grandmother in the corridors of the court, she recites: "During the Sassanid period, people were divided into two classes: the upper privileged class and the ordinary class. Her grandmother corrected that it was supposed to be "ordinary people."
At the other end of the camera, it is Reitz's little daughter, who is subconsciously repeating these difficult sentences, judging from the expression, she does not understand the meaning of the sentences.
You see, the antagonism between classes has been happening subtly since childhood.
This is a priori presupposition, coupled with the constant repetition of the day after tomorrow, until this paradoxical view becomes natural and normal, and then it truly becomes a part of society.
In the environment in which the two children grew up, the division and difference between the bottom family and the middle class of the society are also presented in an intuitive and naked way.
The camera follows Westminster through, seemingly inadvertently sweeping through the layout and furnishings of the home, pianos, computers, paintings in the living room, clean and tidy kitchen utensils, etc., fully indicating the social identity of Nader and Westminster's middle class.
But in Reitz's home, there are dilapidated sofas, peeling walls, simple tea sets and a small kitchen.
Teme's parents and even her grandmother could guide her studies, because they were well-educated intellectuals. But Reitz's youngest daughter, who can only carry a small school bag and follow her mother to work, can only chew those jerky sentences about "class antagonism".
However, when the two families were in a fight, Nader still leaned down and hugged Reitz's daughter and told her, "Don't let the struggle of your fathers hurt you." ”
Nader's intentions were good, he was a good person, but the hurt did happen.
Reitz's daughter and Teme's two children, one witnessed the poverty of the family and the fake fall of his mother; the other endured the pressure of his parents' divorce and helping his father lie.
When Terme told the judge that her father really didn't know Reitz was pregnant, she seemed to have "grown up." It was also at this moment that Teme lost her childhood.
Like the little boy in "The Bike Thief" who witnessed his father stealing the car and being caught, still holding his father's hand, Teme learned at the age of 11 that his father would lie and shirk his responsibilities, and was not a perfect person.
But she still loved him.
At the climax of the film, the eyes of the two girls intersect.
The two people who had been playing together in the yard a second before were now sitting on opposite sides of each other because of the irreconcilable contradictions between the parent class.
The look of hatred in Reitz's daughter's eyes proclaimed a great gulf between the two classes.
The struggle of the fathers inevitably hurts the child in the end.
In "A Parting", the division between the middle class and the bottom of society is already an insurmountable gap, and the powerlessness of this reality will be extremely depressing.
And the differences in this division also extend to the different attitudes of the two classes to faith.
Reitz regarded the Quran as more important than the miscarriage of the child, but Nader was able to lie to the Quran.
Beneath Westminster's slouchy turban, her fiery red hair, neck and shoulders revealed.
However, Reitz always wrapped his hair, shoulders and neck with a black turban.
In addition, if you pay attention, there is also a lot of glass in this film.
Flat glass, embossed glass, tempered glass, frosted glass, bulletproof glass... Layers of glass not only separate classes from class, but also from husband and wife and children.
At the end of the film, the two families settle out of court, and Westminster and Nader are divorced.
The two men stood outside the door, separated by a layer of glass, waiting for each other to answer the cruel question: "With Daddy or With Mommy?" ”
The daughter has made a decision, but the director has not told us the answer, and the film ends with an unknown choice.
"A Parting" is a pretty good movie, it's not just about one family, two families, it's about the whole Iranian society.
From a macro perspective, this is a victory for Farhati, but also a victory for Iranian cinema.
At the same time, it proves to us that wearing shackles can also dance a good dance.
Text/Pippi Film Editorial Department: Tong Yunxi
© Original 丨 Article Copyright: Ppdianying
Please do not reprint in any form without authorization