As I look back on all the films I've watched this Awards Season, I can't stop thinking about the importance of the movie It Was Just An Accident. Maybe that's only because it is the last film I watched, but maybe it's because that movie is asking so many questions that matter deeply.
If I hurt someone, am I responsible for the injury? Do I have a moral duty to feel something for another human being? Can I feel empathy for someone who has caused me deliberate harm? What does it do to me if I deny myself empathy for others?
The director, Jafar Panahi, treats his characters with tenderness, even the ones it is hard to identify with. One character who has caused great pain for others says he did it because, "I thought you were humiliating me, like when I was little." I wonder if there are any ICE agents who aren't acting out that very same pattern?
He demonstrates for us that given one set of circumstances we can view a person as wholly evil and without value but given a different set of circumstances that person can suddenly become someone to whom we instinctively offer care and aid.
What's crazy to think about is that whether we view them as the former or the latter is, in most cases, a choice we get to make. It isn't always an easy choice but we do have control.
Empathy shows up in a big way in a lot of the films this year. Hamnet is dripping with compassion for its central family. Sentimental Value treats all of its characters with this kind of deep care, seeking not to vilify but to see clearly and accept. Sirat is so gentle in presenting its core group of seekers. Kokuho depicts a long and contentious struggle for control between two characters whose points of view are given equal, time, care and attention.
The three horror films in the mix are of particular interest to me. This is a genre that rarely traffics in empathy. If there is ever a time when you cannot afford to choose compassion it is when someone is actively trying to kill you. However Guillermo del Toro's Frankenstein's Creature is afforded radical humanity compared to other versions the same story.
Because of the storytelling style in Weapons, many of the film's victims are given a point of view and goals we can relate to instead of just being placeholders for an eventual body count. Sinners likewise expends the time necessary to identify deeply with all its characters before the monster descends on them. Even then, the villain expresses something very like deep empathy and asks for it in return; like Frankenstein's Creature, he didn't ask to be a monster, it was just an accident.
There are also films heavy on apathy. Bugonia is all about not seeing inherent value in another, but prejudging them and going to extremes to avoid changing that opinion under any circumstance. Marty Supreme is apathetic to everyone in his life; never considering their humanity but viewing them all as a means to an end. F1 doesn't show empathy or ask for it; winning is the only goal here, there's no room for connection beyond that. One Battle After Another centers on a kind of ongoing war, where empathy is completely out of place. The main characters are treated with compassion but it's a shallow offering. Even the villains in One Battle are not convincingly passionate; they are silly, emotionless and nonsensical (not to say they were unconvincing...they were more terrifying because they did feel real.)
Movies are fun because you can try on another life, another reality. You can watch the protagonists on the screen and ask yourself what you would do in their shoes, imagine your own choices and how they might measure up. And of course, there's room for all kinds of movies; from deep thinkers to shallow romps to complete head-scratchers. This year the film makers all seem to be asking us how empathy can change things or conversely, what results will we see in the absence of it? I feel very grateful to Jafar Panahi for inviting us into such a stark look at humanity that can help us to examine our own choices with a little more clarity.
No comments:
Post a Comment