HUSBANDS AND LOVERS
JAN 2, 2010 – MIDWAY THROUGH HIS WIFE’S PHYSIOTHERAPEUTIC ministrations, David (Javier Bardem) – seated in the bathtub – gets amorous. He pulls a mock-protesting Elena (Francesca Neri) in, hoists her by the buttocks, towards his face, and begins to pleasure her. Clutching the water pipes above for support, she moans, “Ti sono molto vicino.” David stops to ask what she just said (in Italian, her tongue). “That feels good,” she translates, and he heads back to where he was earlier. “Even better.” Elena’s subsequent words, however, quash the mood. “I saw Victor Plaza at the funeral,” she says, causing David to come up for air a second time. He’s annoyed, and he asks if she’s sure. She is. Davis is puzzled because he didn’t see Victor (Liberto Rabal). Elena says he was facing the other side.
David swears. He asks, “Did he say anything?” Elena replies that Victor sympathised with her about the loss of her father, and this arouses David in an entirely different fashion. He seethes, “He’s a psychopath. How did he know about the funeral?” Elena doesn’t know. David suggests, “Maybe he followed you. We have to tell the police.” Elena brushes him off, but David insists. “I’m not going to let that madman follow you around.” Elena turns practical and admonishes her enraged husband. “We can’t report him for expressing his sympathy to me in public.” And we know, then, that even if David doesn’t go to the police, he will do something. He does, after all, blame Victor for his plight, for his inability to pleasure his wife in the usual ways other men take for granted. David is a paraplegic.
Sure enough, a little later, David gets into his wheelchair and lands at Victor’s doorstep. He squeezes through the steps and through the door and finds Victor in the middle of push-ups – a virile man in the peak of youth, in full command of every inch of his body. Victor turns and barks, “You know this is illegal entry?” David doesn’t care. “Why were you in the cemetery the other day, spying on my wife?” Despite David’s aggression, it’s hard, at this point, not to feel for him – seated in his wheelchair, he appears to be speaking to Victor’s navel, now that the latter has drawn himself to full height. Eyes shining with tears, Victor replies, “I wasn’t spying on anyone. My mother died while I was inside [prison]. I just happened to be near your *****ing funeral.”
Something isn’t quite right about this situation, for Victor’s face glows with righteous indignation – hardly the mark of a guilty man. Could David be wrong about Victor’s part in the accident that crippled him? We’ll have to flash-forward a few scenes for the answer, when – once again – David confronts Victor (in Elena’s office) and says, “Victor, let’s be frank. That woman who’s just gone out is my wife. I’m crazy about her. I’d do anything to defend her, because she’s all I have. And like all cripples, I’ve got a filthy temper.” Victor retorts, “I’m sure you love your wife and have a filthy temper. But it’s not my business.” David thinks it is. “Come on… Before I met you, I looked up at the sun, the stars, the moon. Since I met you, I have to look down.”
“I have to look at dog shit so I don’t stain my hands, at kerbs so I don’t crack my skull! You condemned me to look down!” As in the earlier scene, Victor’s is the face of an innocent man. He simply says, “I didn’t condemn you to anything!” And he reveals what really happened during the accident. But returning to the scene where we left off, this explanation is still unknown. Why didn’t Victor confess earlier, when David first squeezed through his doorstep? Why wait for that second opportunity, in Elena’s office, to present itself? The answer becomes clear as David appears to sense, like us, that Victor’s face is curiously aglow with innocence. Calming down, he says, “You always happen to be where you shouldn’t.” Victor says he’s not as lucky as David, who wins even in the worst moments.
Victor coveted Elena once, and he knows now that David is married to her – he knows David has won. And now we sense why Victor will not defend himself, why he will not – as yet – protest that he’s innocent. This is the first time they’re meeting after the accident. The injuries are still too raw. They’re still at the macho face-off stage, circling each other like wary dogs, sniffing for the slightest sign of weakness. David sees no option but to get all alpha-male and issue a threat. “If you go near my wife again, I’ll crack your skull.” Victor looks at his impotent, wheelchair-bound guest and smirks, “How?” By way of a reply, David punches Victor in the groin – for the next few seconds, they’re equals, their manhood laid equally waste. But Victor has the last word. As David pitifully wheels himself out, he begins his push-ups again, only this time he stops to clap each time he rises. At least for now, he’s more man.
Carne Trémula (1997; Spanish, Italian; aka Live Flesh). Directed by Pedro Almodóvar. Starring Javier Bardem, Francesca Neri, Liberto Rabal, Ángela Molina.
Copyright ©2010 The New Indian Express. This article may not be reproduced in its entirety without permission. A link to this URL, instead, would be appreciated.
brangan
January 1, 2010
What better way to begin 2010 than with… everyone’s favouritest column 🙂
Happy New Year, all. Happy 2010.
LikeLike
Padawan
January 1, 2010
Happy New Year. Would you be doing a piece on what is the best we can expect in 2010. Say, like Endhiran? Tamil Padam? Naanayam – Tamil’s first heist movie?
LikeLike
vijay
January 1, 2010
Happy new year BR! All I can say is that although I havent seen Carne Tremula (saw Volver twice within a week though) it is good that you didnt begin the year by reviewing Vettaikaaran 🙂 Hope you get to take less bullets in 2010
LikeLike
DPL
January 1, 2010
Ironically enough, I am a Spaniard of indian descent, and I have NEVER watched any of Almodovar’s films. Some critics here consider him an overrated filmmaker who’s still relevant due to his publicised leftist ideas – most of the Spanish media being left-leaning. His movies are scornfully referred to by those critics as “peliculas llenas de maricones, travestis y putas” – movies full with gays, transsexuals and prostitutes. But seeing the love that many international critics – you, Ebert et al. – who I deeply respect profess for his work, I’ll have to give it a try, starting with “Hable con ella”.
LikeLike
DPL
January 1, 2010
Just forgot. Happy New Year, and keep up providing us with our weekly dose!
LikeLike
Just Another Film Buff
January 1, 2010
Happy New Year Mr. Rangan. Hope you have a great year ahead.
Well, I felt this one was a minor work by PA, kind of a transition film…
LikeLike
brangan
January 2, 2010
Padawan: I thought I’d translate the 20-moments into an actual column first, before getting into films to expect in the new year.
vijay: Apparently Vettaikaaran’s brought Vijay back. Heard it’s doing good business.
DPL: Thanks for that POV. It’s not the first time a filmmaker is more loved outside his country. Most Japanese critics considered Kurosawa too “western” and couldn’t see the fuss. Perhaps Almodovar too is very “western” in a sense, for he takes his cues from 50s Hollywood (primarily noir and the “women’s” melodrama). Similarly Hitchcock and Jerry Lewis were more celebrated in France (i.e. taken as serious artists, as opposed to mere entertainers) than by American critics. I wonder if there’s an Indian filmmaker (of the Adoor kind) who’s worshipped overseas but not so much here.
LikeLike
Just Another Film Buff
January 2, 2010
Mr. Rangan, I guess both Guru Dutt and G. Aravindan share that status…
LikeLike
santoshbhoopalan
January 2, 2010
I cant think any Indian filmmaker being celebrated elsewhere, may be Mira Nair, her Monsoon Wedding was well received in the West, but then is she Indian?
BR/DPL : I have seen 2 of Almodóvars films, ‘Volver’ and ‘Broken Embraces'(BE) (recently at Trivandrum film fest). A common theme in his films is his characters seeking redemption from their troubled past. There are often instances of his characters referring to the past actions, attempting to fix it the present. In BE there is this noirish feel throughout the first act and first half of the second, but somehow the flashbacks and then the present restitution dont seem gel well, to the point that becomes to drag a bit towards the end. Yet to see Carne tremula!!
LikeLike
Varun
January 2, 2010
I ‘see’ the portions of the films you describe in these columns. And for your writing alone, these columns are really my favorite (no winking, tongue-dangling smileys here.)
Reg. an Indian filmmaker being celebrated more outside, the two extremes are – Kamal Swaroop (Om dar Badar), whose film ran to full houses in Europe (as per his own claims) while considered more of a madman’s joke here, and Karan Johar, for obvious trade reasons.
LikeLike
vijay
January 2, 2010
Thats very interesting as far as Pedro being considered too western. Because in Volver I saw an unique style or treatment that I could’nt find much elsewhere in Hollywood. I wouldn’t know a whole lot about 50s Hollywood to find if there is a subtle inspiration there. But Almodovar relegates “big” issues like adultery or pedophilia to sub-plot like status while keeping the focus on the big picture-which is how the women go about their lives. He doesn’t make a huge fuss about these things. If this is too Hollywood then I am really interested to see what the other Spanish filmmakers who are supposedly more rooted have to offer
“Apparently Vettaikaaran’s brought Vijay back. Heard it’s doing good business.”
BR, of course it doesn’t hurt that the movie was marketed by Sun pictures who bombard their channels with ads relentlessly and hold celebration functions within a week of the movie’s release.
I think one of the worse things that has happened to Tamil cinema of late are these rival channels with political affiliations turning producers and using their reach/clout to promote mediocre films and will them to a “hit”-like status. An assembly line of forgettable films benefiting a lot from the incessant PR.
LikeLike
DPL
January 2, 2010
Around these parts (Spain), and based on my personal experience, there’s not really much awareness about the existence of an alternative wave in current Indian cinema. Even with fellow movie-goers who are familiar with the works of asian art-house directors (e.g., Kore-eda or Kim Ki-Duk), the equation “Indian Cinema = Song & Dance = Bollywood” is prevalent. Curiously enough, regular film-goers here are familiar with 3 modern “indian” films: Monsoon Wedding, Slumdog Millionaire (both of which are regarded as standard Bollywood fare) and Naina (it was quite a rage at the Sitges fantasy and horror film fest).
However, this situation is not a constant across Europe, we all how things are in the UK. In Germany, mainstream Bollywood is quite popular. In fact, there are a couple German-language magazines dedicated to Bollywood films and gossip (Mohabbatein was the best-selling movie DVD for a few weeks a few years back). Anyway, the awareness about modern alternative cinema is, sadly, almost non-existent (sorry for my verbal incontinence).
LikeLike