Cold War

It took me almost a year to rewatch Cold War, not for lack of want, but for how hard film was to revisit. The pain, torment and anguish is very tangible, and despite the fact the key characters keep making terrible mistakes that lead them into worse and worse positions, I can't help but feel I would make the same steps. What else do you do when you can't stand each other, but you can't stand to be apart from each other? Is this love? Or is love a concept mislabeled, propelled by films like this that seem to glorify harmful and destructive relationships by malicious and foolish people?

Shot in sumptuous black and white, with a stunning soundtrack and stellar performances, Cold War is not a romance film, but rather a tragedy. You know the end when you start, but you drag yourself through the mud to reanalyse every single painful detail. A film that never answers any questions, but lets you resonate with the relationship, actions and consequences of these ill pared, out of sync lovers. Oh oh oh.

I must admit that the movie is not bad. The black and white color style creates a romantic and nostalgic atmoshere, during the era of the beginning of the cold war. There are some impressive and well-played scenes (and that is something the director must be praised for, his visual aesthetic), especially in the beginning of the movie, showing the life in Poland after the war and the folkore culture. The perfume and sense of old times and the illustration of another era are so clear. This is the good side of the movie, that reminds us something of the old romantic movies. On the other hand, a movie that could simply be a masterpiece, it just ends to be "nothing special". The main reason is that, although it considers to be a love-film, love is not clearly illustrated. The spectator cannot really understand why their love is so strong, why these people are so stuck to its other. They continue to move all the time and make love and argue, while there is not enough "heaviness" to their relationship. It becomes boring at some point, just to watch people go around and argue and love each other without a reason. In cocnlusion, while I liked the way that the director presents the capitalist world, giving emphasis to the differences between the east and the west ethics and culture, I didn't like the way of presentation of the communist side, because he concentrates only to authority, power, jails and no freedom at all. The movie just left me with a sense, that I was expecting something more.

The first time I saw Cold War, I fell asleep halfway through it at AFI Fest 2018. That was my fourth film of the day, and I was extremely tired. I felt very bad, so I was very eager for when the film would be released to the public so that I could give it another try. Today is that day.

Well, after seeing it for a second time (and unfortunately being two to three minutes late), I actually think there was more than tiredness that caused me to fall asleep in the first screening. I truly think that Cold War is the epitome of what style over substance is. This film has such a bad plot, uninteresting characters, and a story that flashed through more than a decade in eighty-five minutes. Cold War tries to disguise its faults with spectacular black and white cinematography, a stunning vocal score, and a pretentious choice of a historical time period, but I was not fooled for one bit.

The plot was so thin that I could not even begin to describe how ridiculously simple, yet annoying it was:

"Man who is a musical director finds a female singer with incredible talent. He leads her to fame. One day they eye-flirt at a party. They bang pretty intensely. Then, one year goes by without talking to each other. They meet one day on the sidewalk. They both declare they have significant others. But, because of their erratic attraction for each other, they have intercourse again. And then they bang again and again. Then they go on tour. She gets more famous. Then, five years go by. After not speaking to each other, they meet each other yet again. They both declare they are married to other people. But because of their lustful nature, they BANG yet again. And again. Then they decide to drop their husband/wife and become a couple. They start to fight. Then they bang to make up. Then she gets mad at him. Then she slaps him. Then seven years go by. They bang. Then, they get married. The end."

In other words, the plot of this film revolves around two people whose love affair can be simplified as "hey baby, let's get it on." There is hardly any dialogue between them that is romantically sincere. It is all just sexual or boring exposition. I felt nothing for these two people. And I really didn't care.

For all you love it to death, good for you. But I prefer films with better developed characters at the expense of extremely pretentious cinematography. How about the Before Trilogy that isn't beautifully shot by any means, but the characters are excellently portrayed.

All in all, I wish this film was better than the camera thinks it is.

The first thing to state about this beautiful movie is that it's monochrome. So stunningly so that at times you feel you are in a photographic gallery rather than a cinema. The quality of the cinematography is quite extraordinary thanks to Lucas Zal.

It's also in 4:3 format. Not the square format of Instagram, but close.

We don't see 4:3 very often these days but Wes Anderson used it to immense effect in Grand Budapest Hotel and so did Lazslo Melis in Son of Saul.

It's an engaging format that draws you in. It suggests a time before cinemascope (16:9 etc) and only really works in period cinema of a time.

This time.

But it also lends itself to incredible framing, such as when our female protagonist floats down a river gradually disappearing out of shot, and later in the movie when the chief protagonists leave a bus and walk out of frame in a composition that Henri Cartier Breson would be proud of.

It's one of the most beautiful movies I've seen in many years.

In truth that's probably its biggest strength.

It is, but it isn't really, narrative driven. More episodic than story driven but it does tell a tale about director Pawel Pawlikowski's parents' love affair set against the Cold War backdrop in his native Poland.

It's fairly sordid in a way (his mother was abused by her father as a child) but without anything shocking to see.

Imagine, yes.

The two leads ( Joanna Kulig and Tomasz Kot) are magnificent. Brooding, beautiful (although unconventionally so) and real.

Lucas Zal has a great time dwelling on three particular things. Crowd shots. Amazing, Dance sequences. Amazing. Joanna Kulig (the lead). Amazing.

In particular, Joanna Kulig has a stand out performance. She's not one to show her enjoyment in life. Sullen most would say. But it is an immense performance.

It's a love story, set against the challenges that Cold War Poland put in front of people of artistic belief where communist doctrine made creativity very difficult.

What Pawel Pawlikowski achieves is a mood piece of exemplary, peerless really, detail.

And it's a musical.

I was constantly drawn to comparing it to La La Land, yet it is so NOT La La Land. Partly it's down to Kulig who shares the unorthodox looks (beauty) of Emma Stone. Partly it's the framing of Zal.

And the music fuses from Polish country folk to French basement jazz (which La La Land would have been so comfortable with).

This is an Oscar nomination shoe in. It's absolutely brilliant.

And, at 88 minutes, certainly does not outstay its welcome.

Bravo!

A Straight 10 from me.

This is another case of style over content. The look of this film is stunning , deliberately reminiscent of the European films of the 50'sand 60's however there is no substance to the story. The script jumps years and places so many times that we never care enough about the main characters and their love story which is the main focus of the film (some would say only focus) as the major political changes that took place during this period are kept so far in the background that they seem insignificant and ultimately irrelevant.The jazz sequences in a Paris cafe only seem to be included to show some great smoky black and white photography rather than to move the plot forward. I appreciate that this is a very personal story for the director but in the transition to the screen he has lost the tragedy and emotion that he wanted to convey to audiences... and what could have been a great film is only 'quite good'.