Pie de página

Greetings again from the darkness. In the United States, we typically get limited access to the films of Israel. In recent years, there have been two that I like very much: The Band's Visit, and Waltz for Bashir. Written and directed by Joseph Cedar, Footnote was nominated for the Best Foreign Language Academy Award. It's a very creative and insightful story utilizing slight comedic elements to show the destructive forces of petty professional jealousy within a family.

Most parents wish for true happiness for their children. If the professional success of their offspring far exceeds their own ... it is a reason to swell with parental pride. But what happens when father and son choose similar paths? What happens when animosity builds as the father's life work (30 years of research) is deemed unnecessary and irrelevant? What happens when the son becomes publicly revered and adored for his populist writing? Well, in the case of father Eliezer (Shlomo Bar-Aba) and son Uriel (Lior Ashkenazi), we get strained relations and a thesis on the pitfalls of pride and ego.

All of that is sufficiently fascinating for a story, but here we get an even more severe test of human nature. The father is erroneously informed that he has won the prestigious Israel Award, providing vindication and meaning to his work and well, his being. See, the award was supposed to go to the other Professor Shkolnik ... yes, his son. This much is shown in the trailer, but the true guts of this story is what happens after this mistake.

There are a few tremendous scenes in the film, but two really jumped out for me. In an early scene, the son is receiving yet another reward and he is attempting to provide some credit for his father's inspiration. However, the words seem to add credence to the irrelevancy instead. The best part? The camera never leaves the face of the father and he sits quietly listening in immeasurable pain. The other scene takes place in a beyond cramped meeting room for the Award committee to discuss the mistake with Uriel. The manner it is filmed and the choreography more than make up for the fact that the group of brilliant people never thought to find a more suitable meeting place.

The score of the film is one that I would appreciate more without having the film playing. The music is wonderful, but often distracting to the moment. It is interesting to note how it changes along with the posture and walking pace of Eliezer after he is informed of his award. One need not be an academic researcher or writer to understand the damaged relationship between father and son ... and how it has impacted wives, mothers and sons. That's a story that is painful in any language.

It's not like this is a bad movie but it's just one like dozens of others, that get made each year, mostly in Europa or as little art-house movies in America. When watching this movie I just couldn't help wondering what was supposed to be so special about it. In my opinion there is nothing special about it really but that of course does not make this a bad movie to watch as well.

It's simply an enjoyable and light little movie, that doesn't ever get too heavy handed, even though it could had easily gone that way. And I thank the movie for that but at the same time it's also giving too little in return.

The movie is taking a more comedy approach to its buildup but with as a problem that there isn't really any true comedy in this movie. It sort of reminded me of a Wes Anderson movie. They are supposed to be comical movies, without anything comical ever happening in it really. It's just not my favorite style of film-making but I know I'm probably a minority on this, so to most people, this won't be a complaint at all.

It's a movie with a good enough story, that ensures that the movie keeps going at all time. It's definitely not a boring movie to watch, despite of a slower type of approach at times.

I wasn't the biggest fan of its visual and technical approach though. I don't know, I guess I have just seen a bit too many movies like this already, so I'm sort of starting to get fed up with these type of movies looking all the same with its camera-handling and editing, that all should remind you of a more indie type of movie. I really did wish that this movie would bad done some more new and interesting stuff at times. That way I would had, no doubt, got more into the movie and would had found it more interesting and pleasant to watch all. It now instead is not a movie that I can wholeheartedly or enthusiastically recommend to you, since it just isn't ever doing anything special, with its story, characters or visuals.

Certainly not bad and still quite good for what it is but it's still a movie you could so easily do without.

7/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

This is a very good movie, but it could be better. The feel of the whole story very much reminded me of the Coen Brothers movie 'a serious man'. It has the same sense of general awkwardness in its characters. The story is very well told. It has a chapter structure and the parts of father and son have kind of symmetry to it, resulting in a feeling of bittersweet irony. If you like irony in all its layers and subtleties, then this is definitely something to watch. The one thing that could make this movie better in my opinion, is the climax that the whole movie is building up to, but which is left to your imagination. In my taste a little too much so, but decide for yourself!

Though Joseph Cedar's Footnote is a look at the Israeli academic community's insularity and hubris, the problems it raises are universal and the film could most likely take place anywhere in the world. One of five nominated films at this year's Oscars in the Best Foreign Film category, Footnote allows us to take a peak behind the hallowed walls of academia and it is not a pretty sight. With its exposure of political maneuvering, egotism, ambition, and tightly controlled orthodoxy, the film makes clear its point of view that professors who are out of the mainstream are marginalized and passed over for recognition by their peers.

The film centers on Eliezer Shkolnik (Schlomo Bar Aba), an aging Talmudic scholar and philologist, who has become a bitter and aggrieved man after having been passed over for the prestigious Israel Prize for twenty years. Eliezer arrogantly denounces the selection committee for the Prize as people who have forgotten the meaning of true scholarship. He has spent his career researching corrupted Jewish texts that deviate from the original Talmud, but whose only recognition has been a citation in a footnote.

Ill at ease in the hallowed walls of academia and in relationships in general, Eliezer sleeps in his office and only ventures out to go to the library. He continues to schedule classes even though as little as one or two people enroll. His relationship with his wife Yehudit (Alisa Rosen) appears strained and distant and, when he is at home, he blocks out the world by putting on gigantic yellow earphones. His behavior is contrasted with that of his more sociable and outgoing son, the bearded Uriel (Lior Ashkenazi) who is also a Talmudic scholar but one whose work is more attuned to popular tastes. His father, unfortunately, is generally disdainful, calling him a "folklorist" and a scholar subservient to the prevailing academic status quo.

The film opens with Eliezer sitting in an auditorium with a dour and rigid look on his face as Uriel is being inducted into a scholarly academy, an honor which the father has never received. Despite the downbeat beginning, the first part of the film is fairly lighthearted with Cedar entertaining us with inter-titles describing the background of the characters and Amelie-like cutesy cinematic tricks bouncily scored by Amit Poznansky. Halfway through, however, the film takes a more dramatic turn when Eliezer learns that he has finally won the Israel Prize after waiting for twenty years, an event that threatens the resentment he clings to so obsessively.

Unfortunately, a ridiculous faux-pas by the Nominating Committee only serves to place more obstacles in the father-son relationship. It is, unfortunately, not an easily correctable mistake but a true ethical dilemma and one that precipitates a confrontation between Uriel and the academic committee in a tiny room, an absurd scenario that would be funny if it did not have so many potential disastrous ramifications. The brunt of Uriel's attack is directed towards Yehuda Grossman (Michah Lewesohn), a scholar who has either rejected or ignored his father's work and whose publication of his own Talmudic discovery undermined all the meticulous research Eliezer had been doing for years. In the film's most dramatic sequence, the confrontation escalates into highly articulated personal attacks, ultimatums, and even a bit of physical violence.

While Uriel is defending his father at the committee meeting, Eliezer is doing the opposite, criticizing his son during an interview, lumping him in with those whose Talmudic studies he considers to be shallow and superficial. Needless to say, this even further exacerbates their troubled relationship. Footnote is an engaging film marked by exceptional performances by Lewesohn, Ashkenazi, and Bar Aba and you can enjoy it whether or not you care very much whether or not the current version of the Talmud correctly reflects the original ancient texts. The depiction of Eliezer, however, is one-dimensional and the father's incessant self-righteousness turns the film into a sour and mostly unpleasant affair. In addition to its depressing tone, numerous plot points are introduced and then dropped without further comment.

Eliezer is seen talking to another woman, a sequence that leads to a bedroom discussion of the event between Uriel and his wife Dikla (Alma Zack), but soon morphs into an argument, its purpose obscure. Also in another thread that goes nowhere except to add to the general unpleasantness, Uriel's son Josh (Daniel Markovich) goes on a hiking trip and comes home having to confront his father's anger at his ostensible lack of ambition or goals. Although the film's loose ends are particularly annoying, we are caught up in its very compelling scenario. Cedar knows how to build up the tension and we eagerly await some sort of resolution but, as is the trend of late, the director feels that his film is more valuable as a gigantic set-up than as a satisfying resolution and the result is a film that leaves us thinking that the projectionist inadvertently cut out the best part of the movie.

FOOTNOTE is the second Israeli film I've seen and while it felt rather insular in the cultural sense, it did explore some interesting themes and had a great sense of humor. The story is about a father and son, both professors of Talmudic literature. The father has largely been forgotten, his only significant achievement being a mention in a footnote in someone else's book, while his son is more celebrated. However, the dynamic between them changes when the father is selected (errantly) to receive the prestigious Israel Prize for his life's work. One thing the film does really well is explore the sometimes contentious relationship between parent and child. Eliezer (father) and Uriel (son) Shkolnik both have the same profession, yet the son's success in light of the father's failure certainly must have weighed heavily on both of their consciences. And when Eliezer is mistakenly nominated to receive the Israel Prize, his son comes to his defense since it would vindicate the decades of work for which he had previously gone unrecognized. There was also the subtle element of comedy and self-deprecating humor that seems to be part and parcel of the Jewish experience. It wasn't exactly laugh-out-loud hilarious, but there was some excellent situational humor as well as some ribbing on cutthroat competition in academia. Still, given the subject material it was a little hard for me to get into the film completely. The single element which I did connect with was the idea that a parent at some point might give up on their child, as I have had similar fears in the past. The film also had a somewhat unsatisfying ending, although it probably didn't have to show everything in order to be effective. The film was subversive enough without seeing what you know is coming. If there's one actual complaint I have, it's that the score was a little overpowering at times. Sometimes, more is less. Overall, the subject of academia is something that's a little too "inside baseball," particularly when it's about the Talmud (I'm not a Jew), but FOOTNOTE has some interesting themes that allow you a way into this story about a father-son rivalry.