![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
XIX: The Believer (Henry Bean, 2001)
I think I ordered this after having a discussion with KV as to whether it was Ryan Reynolds or Ryan Gosling - you know, that startling young actor, makes a name in indie, has a mainstream hit, and becomes a whatever became of within five years. And, leaving Fracture to one side, and despite (apparently) The Nines I think it's Gosling.
Someone with a better knowledge of Judaism is likely to appreciate this film better than I - or maybe less than I - and it's going to have spoilers.
Daniel (Gosling) is central to a group of racist, anti-Jewish thugs, but seems even more committed to violence than his friends. After visiting a particularly outspoken fascist (Billy Zane) he is approached by a journalist who notes that Daniel is a Jew. Through the rest of the film we are in turmoil - is he a self-hating Jew? has something in the mindless and hypocritical law turned him against childhood beliefs? has he infiltrated the group to expose them (anti-Semitism having been downplayed)? is he provoking his own people from playing the victim? or is he fascinated by the centuries of racism having had the impact of making a group of people even stronger in their identity and that forcing integration would destroy Jewishness more than exclusion? It seems to be tending toward the latter.
And yet there's a deeper, darker part. The key argument in Daniel's education is over God's demand to Abraham that he slays his only son, Isaac. It seems to have been a test, a test of Abraham's obedience, and Isaac is spared in favour of a goat. Daniel won't let this story lie. At the end of the film, in what is clearly meant to be a depiction of a purgatorial afterlife (this doesn't feel like Orthodox Judaism any more), Daniel repeatedly avoids the teacher who had spoken to him of Abraham and Isaac.
The question for me is which character is Daniel identifying with - is he an Abraham who tests God, demanding that he save his chosen people from Daniel actions; is he Isaac, wanting to be sacrificed, or is he setting himself up to be God. I don't think the film quite knows the answer.
It would be very easy to see this as an American History X retread, with Gosling as Norton - and of course that was a film which ended up in a pat, gosh, I know a decent black man, I have been such a fool to be racist all these years kind of way. I don't think this is offering consolation as that did - unless there's a sense of Daniel being redeemed. But then maybe everyone can be.
Totals: 19 - Cinema: 5; DVD: 14; Television: 0
I think I ordered this after having a discussion with KV as to whether it was Ryan Reynolds or Ryan Gosling - you know, that startling young actor, makes a name in indie, has a mainstream hit, and becomes a whatever became of within five years. And, leaving Fracture to one side, and despite (apparently) The Nines I think it's Gosling.
Someone with a better knowledge of Judaism is likely to appreciate this film better than I - or maybe less than I - and it's going to have spoilers.
Daniel (Gosling) is central to a group of racist, anti-Jewish thugs, but seems even more committed to violence than his friends. After visiting a particularly outspoken fascist (Billy Zane) he is approached by a journalist who notes that Daniel is a Jew. Through the rest of the film we are in turmoil - is he a self-hating Jew? has something in the mindless and hypocritical law turned him against childhood beliefs? has he infiltrated the group to expose them (anti-Semitism having been downplayed)? is he provoking his own people from playing the victim? or is he fascinated by the centuries of racism having had the impact of making a group of people even stronger in their identity and that forcing integration would destroy Jewishness more than exclusion? It seems to be tending toward the latter.
And yet there's a deeper, darker part. The key argument in Daniel's education is over God's demand to Abraham that he slays his only son, Isaac. It seems to have been a test, a test of Abraham's obedience, and Isaac is spared in favour of a goat. Daniel won't let this story lie. At the end of the film, in what is clearly meant to be a depiction of a purgatorial afterlife (this doesn't feel like Orthodox Judaism any more), Daniel repeatedly avoids the teacher who had spoken to him of Abraham and Isaac.
The question for me is which character is Daniel identifying with - is he an Abraham who tests God, demanding that he save his chosen people from Daniel actions; is he Isaac, wanting to be sacrificed, or is he setting himself up to be God. I don't think the film quite knows the answer.
It would be very easy to see this as an American History X retread, with Gosling as Norton - and of course that was a film which ended up in a pat, gosh, I know a decent black man, I have been such a fool to be racist all these years kind of way. I don't think this is offering consolation as that did - unless there's a sense of Daniel being redeemed. But then maybe everyone can be.
Totals: 19 - Cinema: 5; DVD: 14; Television: 0
Tags: