Mary Magdalene

Seen at the beautiful Regent Cinema in Ballarat

Bea says: This film was striking in its simple beauty.  The lives of Jesus and the disciples were simple, with few if any possessions and little money.  Clothing was plain and serviceable, with few changes of garments, a blanket worn over the shoulder which doubled as something for sleeping, and the only decoration being beautiful embroidery.  Indeed, there is a special scene where Mary (Rooney Mara) gets a newly embroidered dress to wear when her intended husband comes for dinner, but when Mary leaves home to follow Jesus (Joaquin Phoenix) she takes nothing but her blanket.  Everyone looks exactly like they did in my copy of the Children’s Bible, but with beautiful cinematography.\

The pace was also simple – slow, with frequent long silences.  Afterwards, Cecil and I thought that it would have reflected the pace of life then, without so many things to distract.  Walking in the wilderness to get from place to place, hearing only the sound of birds, for example.  Very different from rushing out of the house, trying to remember everything, getting into a car or onto a train, checking email, etc etc.

I have some knowledge of the story, but not, it turned out, full knowledge.  I did not know that Mary was actually from Magdalene (hence her name; I had just thought it was her name); I did not actually know that she had travelled extensively with Jesus and the disciples, that she baptised people (particularly women), or that she was first to spread the news of Jesus’ resurrection.  I knew that her reputation as a fallen woman was disputed, and I was also aware of the various Dan Brown-esque ideas about her having Jesus’ child and so on.  This film aims to present Mary as a kind of 13^th disciple, or “apostle of apostles” which apparently the Vatican now recognises her as, and it is refreshing to see her life interpreted this way rather than the usual rather sexualised and misogynistic view of her that has been presented over the years.  The film also showcases the politics of religion that the disciples fell in to quite well.

The film tries to follow Mary’s experience so skips over some key events in the lead up to the crucifixion – Pontius Pilate doesn’t appear, Peter (or is it Paul?) doesn’t deny Jesus, we don’t see any conversions happening on the crosses and the 40 days in the wilderness is only vaguely alluded to, but as my knowledge of the story is primarily based on King of Kings, Ben Hur and the previously mentioned Children’s Bible, I can’t attest as to the accuracy of any of this.  Plenty of things do make it in – Judas, the thieves in the temple, for example.

The film’s beauty has stayed with me, and it was seasonally appropriate as well.  My only criticism would be that Mary had rather lovely pale skin for someone who lived a rough subsistence life in Judea at that time….Otherwise, recommended as an interesting take on a well-known story.

***1/2

Cecil says: Bea is right of course about Rooney Mara’s pale skin being rather unlikely in the harsh glare of constant sun and an outdoor life, as she would have had both before her time as the 13th apostle and even in the more sheltered home life before.

Having said that, there was something captivating about her face. We are briefly in the position of the sick or disabled to whom Mary comes to relieve of suffering and it did remind me of my own hospital visit 20 odd years ago when I woke from general anaesthetic to find the face of a nurse right next to my face, saying something like ‘hello’. That felt powerful enough, so it is easy to imagine the immensity of someone like Mary suddenly appearing in your life when you are someone society has given up on; I can imagine many a conversion happened on the back of that.

The producers of Mary Magdalene the film chose their set well. It wasn’t filmed anywhere near Jerusalem, but having been there and to Jordan and the Occupied Territories, I can attest to the fact that it did bring back memories of my momentous few weeks there over 30 years ago now (funnily enough, linking back to the nurse and surgery experience, since I injured my back trying to do a breaststroke kick in the salty Dead Sea, and that started the whole journey, which I feel I am still on today, really).

I don’t know the Biblical tales as well as Bea, but I did think Judas comes across as rather a sympathetic character in this film. A zealot, maybe, but if he was the one who betrayed Jesus, there was no sign in this film of payment to Judas, and we are left with the impression that he acted because he felt this might precipitate society’s move towards the Promised Land.

Mary Magdalene is certainly slow paced, but as Bea says, this felt right for the time and place it was depicting.

***

Her

Seen at Cines Trueba in San Sebastian (Donostia)

Cecil says:  To be honest, the trailers in cinemas hadn't made me rush to see this film. After all, the story of some geeky guy falling in love with a voice on his computer didn't really sound like my kind of movie.

But when you're in a foreign country - especially a country like Spain where the vast majority of foreign films are dubbed rather than subtitled - you sometimes have to go with the flow and see something you wouldn't normally choose to back home.

Actually, I enjoyed this film.

Theodore is far from geeky, though I'm not convinced that moustaches will come back into fashion a 'few years into future' when this film is supposedly set. He has a very creative job working for the wonderfully named BeautifulHandWrittenLetters.com, where his job is write very intimate letters for customers who clearly have better things to do in this not-too-distant future.

But his problem is that he is going through a divorce and he is feeling lonely, while struggling to separate fully from his estranged wife.

The film plots his growing relationship with an Operating System (OS), called Samantha (with Scarlett Johansson's voice), whose computer learns more about him the more they talk and gradually takes on human-like emotions, leading the two of them to fall in love.

On one level it's quite a plausible premise, when you look at a busy tube station or bus stop and everybody is glued to their smart phone these days, probably engaging with real friends, but who knows?

And on some levels, a computer that is programmed to meet all your needs and to adapt to any it can't quite meet is bound to seem quite alluring. But of course, although they have 'sex' together, there is the gap of real physical intimacy, which Samantha rather bizarrely suggests overcoming by calling in a 'surrogate' to play the part of a body. Things don't quite work out and, although to keep the plot going, Theodore somehow wants to maintain the relationship afterwards, as a viewer from that moment on it does seem doomed, and I couldn't help thinking that that was the point where he would stop things by saying: Hold on, No, this is not real.

But hey, the film needed to keep going another 45 minutes so instead they threw in a storyline where it's the Operating Systems (not just Theodore's) that move on and distance themselves.

This idea reminded me of that much scarier Dr Who episode where the aliens quickly learn how humans operate by copying and repeating everything, at first slowly and then faster and faster until they end up saying things before the humans have, and they go on to control humankind. So, although I enjoyed my evening in San Sebastian with this nice psycho-romance drama, I actually preferred the Dr Who version of a computer takeover.

But maybe in the not-too-distant future there will be more and more films like this...

***

Bea says: 
I have always been a fan of Scarlett Johansson - ever since Lost in Translation which I really, really liked (although thousands didn't), so although like Cecil I had my reservations about the plot, I was prepared to give it a go. Instead of Dr Who though, the plot reminded me of a terrible ?1970s ?1980s sci-fi movie called Demon Seed - anyone remember that one? - in which a computer tries to take over the world by impregnating a woman.

Associations aside however, this was a rather nice film about being lonely in the middle of life, in the midst of a city, and despite every available form of communication known to man in place.  Loneliness is an enduring theme that everyone can relate to, and has frequently been explored in this type of winsome romantic city-set film (Breakfast at Tiffany's, Frankie and Johnny, to name a few).  This just does it with a quirky twist - the use of an OS instead of a person - and maybe through that tries to tap into what it means to be human, or maybe doesn't quite get there.  Joaquin Phoenix is superb, and carries the film as he is in nearly every scene and often alone.  The writing is excellent, the cinematography wonderful and music and soundtrack is well used.

Definitely recommended - even if you think it's not for you.  A particularly good option if you find yourself in a city, on a Sunday afternoon, with no friends around and on your own.

***