52 Films by Women Vol 2. 25. BERLIN SYNDROME (Director: Cate Shortland)
For film directors, third films can be difficult. Your debut
has calling card qualities - pace, invention and a fresh perspective. Your
follow-up can consolidate your strengths but also make a statement about what
you’re really about. Your third film is more commercial. You show what you can
do with someone else’s material and – on occasion – someone else’s script. If
you discount An Angel at My Table (a
TV series released as a movie), The
Portrait of a Lady is Jane Campion’s third film, a dull and emotionally
unengaged adaptation of a Henry James novel starring Nicole Kidman and John
Malkovich. Quentin Tarantino’s third film is Jackie Brown, a remarkably unadventurous adaptation of an Elmore
Leonard novel, Rum Punch. If you
discount Boxcar Bertha, an assignment
for Roger Corman, Martin Scorsese’s third feature is Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore in which he proved – sort of – that
he could make a women’s picture. Steven Soderbergh’s third film was the
mechanical King of the Hill, a rather
restrained work. I could go on.
Berlin Syndrome is
Australian director Cate Shortland’s third feature and it left me disappointed.
Based on a novel by Melanie Joosten and scripted by Shaun
Grant, it is a kidnap genre film about an Australian tourist, Claire (Teresa
Palmer) who backpacks to Berlin and meets up with a sensitive Berliner, Andi (Max
Riemelt) who makes her linger. She intends to go to Dresden. Instead, she seeks
him out – and there he is in the same bookshop where they met, reading a book
on Klimt. He uses inappropriate English words even though he is an English
teacher. How charming! How romantic! How untrustworthy!
After a night of passionate lovemaking, Claire awakens in
Andi’s apartment to find he has gone to work. There is no key. Did he forget? It
soon becomes obvious that she is a marked woman. Her shoulder bears the tattoo
‘meine’. Andi has no intention of letting her go. He took her sim card and her
necklace, the latter is the only thing she has worth hocking. His apartment is
the only occupied one in a slum tenement. No neighbours - only the view of an
internal yard. The windows are reinforced. In Berlin, no one can hear you
scream – for true.
Shortland is not the first woman director to be drawn to
kidnap stories. In Lola Doillon’s In Your
Hands (Contre Toi), Kristin Scott
Thomas plays a doctor held prisoner by the widower (Pio Marmaï) of one of her
patients who died during surgery. There the kidnapper blames his captive. Anger
is worked through and the captive begins to feel some sympathy – or empathy –
for her captor. There is a (very small) sub-genre in women’s cinema in which
women are held captive by men.
Why is this material of interest? Because it is a metaphor!
In a man’s world, a woman feels trapped. In kidnap dramas, the experience of
being held against one’s will is acute. Sarah Gavron’s film adaptation of
Monica Ali’s novel, Brick Lane, deals
with this phenomenon in the context of forced marriage among the East End
Bangladeshi community.
If you are really going to do this story right, you have to
show both the captor and the victim’s perspectives. Shortland doesn’t do that,
at least not evenly. She explains her psychotic villain, Andi, very well. He
was born in East Germany. His mother defected and never returned, even when the
country was unified in 1989. Andi grew up feeling he needed to entrap women, so
they wouldn’t leave him (again). Never mind that, to do this, he would be drawn
to murder. His first victim was a Canadian tourist. Her hair, apparently, is still
stuck down the plughole.
So Andi’s an insecure male with mother issues; but what
about Claire? She has a close relationship with her mother – her father isn’t
mentioned at all. You sense Claire’s father doesn’t exist in her life. Yet she
doesn’t have the same desire to trap a man. She isn’t traumatised in an obvious
way. However, she is looking to connect. The trip to Berlin is a search for
something. Significantly, she does not talk about school friends. Both Claire
and Andi appear to be only children.
In a Hollywood film, Claire’s issues would come out in the
wash. There would be something in her that draws the psychotic Andi to her. At
one point, she asks him: ‘at what point did you decide I would be next?’ He was
watching her taking photographs; we see her photographing a woman beating a rug
outside her third (or fourth) storey window, adapting to the environment. It is
an odd thing to do in a city.
At one point, Claire attempts to escape by stabbing Andi
with a screwdriver. This is the crowd rousing part of any thriller when the
heroine makes a concerted effort to bolt. I won’t tell you exactly how it plays
out, but both Claire and Andi end up with injured hands. In a bizarre way,
Shortland is emphasizing that these two souls have something in common, no
matter how unorthodox their relationship is.
In a thriller like this, you need to maintain tension. So
inevitably one of Andi’s students visits his flat; Claire is unable to convey
to her that she is being held against her will. In a slightly more absurd
sequence, Claire is taken to a forest by Andi, who is wielding an axe. He would
have done something unspeakable if he hadn’t come across two boys, one of whom
is injured.
Andi pays his lecturer father numerous visits and at one
point leaves Claire alone with no electricity or gas. Berlin winters can be
brutal. There is a reason for his ‘alleinzeit’
but Claire can’t really sympathise with him, or at least be convincing.
In a particular act of cruelty, we see Claire left alone with
only a copy of Ted Hughes’ Collected Poems (Faber edition) 1957-1981 for
company. What a bastard! As many of the audience will know, Ted kept his wife,
Sylvia Plath, a prisoner of sorts, cheating on her, leaving her in a cold North
London house in winter to care for two young children whilst nursing her
children. He even destroyed the manuscript of her second novel, Double Exposure and sections of the
third. Plath’s life ended in suicide.
The finale is particularly contrived and makes a mockery of
the film’s internal logic. At the end of the film, Berlin is seen rather
differently, not through a camera lens, but as a place of estrangement.
The genre elements really let the film down. Shortland’s
second film, Lore, also set in
Germany, just at the end of the Second World War, showed a teenage girl, the
daughter of a Nazi, undertaking a perilous journey to her grandmother’s house.
Not only was it acutely tense but every dramatic development felt earned. Here,
contrivance is all too obvious and it has none of the psychological grip. Lore explored the extent to which a
child should answer for her upbringing and her parents’ behaviour. It was a deeply
rich, troubling and satisfying movie. By contrast, Berlin Syndrome is just ‘meh’ as young folk call it.
Reviewed at Soho Hotel, Tuesday 4 April 2017, 18:30 press preview. With thanks to Curzon Artificial Eye
Review originally published on Bitlanders.com
Comments
Post a Comment