The Great Ganesha

[Originally on Blogcritics]

Milos Forman’s (One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest, Amadeus) latest movie can be divided into two halves: The first half being intellectual masturbation for the anti-war groups; and the second half, a historical melodrama. Putting the two together results in a political soap opera which is as intellectually compelling (and just as easy on the eye) as two attractive undergraduates in a fancy restaurant, discussing politics with a vaulted rally of typified liberal clich?s.

The movie is more about Brother Lorenzo (Javier Bardem) than it is about Goya (Stellan Skarsg?rd). The latter is relegated to the background, perhaps symbolic of his real-life role as passive chronicler of history. Goya survived several vacillations in Spain’s political climate by agreeing to paint for anyone in power, including the church. At the same time though, he created etchings which were dark and satirical and show up frequently through the movie.

So while Goya is painting portraits of In?s Bilbat?a (Natalie Portman) and Brother Lorenzo, the latter, armed only with his ambition and (for some reason) an overtly dulcet tone leads a movement for increased action against heretics. This results in the official summoning of In?s who is under suspicion of following “ancient Judaistic rituals” since she was spotted refusing to eat pork at a tavern one night. And in a scene transition that New York Times critic Matt Zoller Seitz calls “an early candidate for transition of the year” she is “put to the Question” (a euphemism for torture), confesses to being a heretic, and is imprisoned. She is, in reality, a devout Christian but simply doesn’t like pork.

Goya Unveils a Painting of Queen Mar?a Luisa (Blanca Portillo)

In?s?s father, Tom?s ( a rich merchant), asks Goya for help, who arranges for Brother Lorenzo to dine at their residence one night. As we learn, Tom?s has other intentions and though the evening starts with a civilized dinner argument about “the Question,” it ends with Lorenzo hanging upside-down from the chandelier suspended by his wrists, and ultimately agreeing to sign a confession that he is the “bastard child of a chimpanzee.” As far as entertainment value goes, this was the movie?s climax, with everything after this being soporific in comparison.

Bardem acted well, despite a shallow characterization, but Skarsg?rd was miscast as a background character. Goya surfaces in the second half only insofar as the Portman characters of In?s and her daughter physically resemble characters from his etchings. If only her portrayals were as interesting.

Forman survived Nazi and Czech communist rule and that probably played a part in the creation of the movie. He is most famous for his riveting and thought-provoking depictions of real-life geniuses and rebels – those who exist on Society’s fringes (McMurphy,Mozart, Flynt, Kauffman). Here, though the production is slick, he provides us with only a very brief glimpse of the inherent conflict and drama associated with such personalities. The script, co-written by Forman and Bu?uel regular, Jean-Claude Carri?re, might work as a Dadaist feature, but fails as a historical drama, and is even more disappointing as a biopic.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!