The Motion Picture Academy was right about this Best Foreign
Language Film.
Here's a question for you. Someone with a glittering eye, like
Coleridge's Ancient Mariner, buttonholes you on your way to a
wedding. Like the Ancient Mariner too, he has a fascinating story
to tell, and he prefaces it by saying this: "A guy can change
anything. His face, his home, his family, his girlfriend, his
religion, his God. But there's one thing he can't change. He
can't change his passion." Do you believe him? In one way, he
himself seems so passionate that you think he ought to know, and
the thing does sound sort of profound. Yes, it certainly
ought to be true -- and, if you stipulate that it is,
you get to hear his story whose fascination depends on just this
assumption about passion. In fact, without it the story would
hardly even make sense. It seems a small price to pay for the
satisfaction the story gives you.
Once you manage to tear yourself away from the Mariner and
have a moment to reflect, however, you can't help thinking that
that central proposition, this assumption on which all else
depends, is nonsense. Passion dies and changes like everything
else. Some people don't have it at all, and for some it is only
the thing of a moment, a sudden summer storm that blows up and
immediately dissipates. Even those rare souls for whom a
particular passion amounts to a lifelong obsession for the most
part live their lives pretty much like the rest of us. Unless
they associate exclusively with those who share their passion,
they have to disguise it in order to avoid being a bore to those
around them. At any rate, it must be easier than disguising one's
face.
El secreto de sus ojos, now released
here as The Secret in Their Eyes, by Juan José
Campanella (Son
of the Bride) is just like that Ancient
Mariner, and one of its characters, Pablo Sandoval (Guillermo
Francella), says what he says -- the thing about unchanging
passion. And, lo, while you are listening to him, you may find it
easy to believe. I know I did. But if you are more of a
rationalist or a harsher judge than I, I can well imagine that
you might find yourself saying, when you see it: What tosh! But
if, like me, you don't say it until after the lights go up and
you're back out on the street, then I think you might just like
this movie as much as I did, and as much as did the Motion
Picture Academy, always better judges of foreign than domestic
pictures, when it awarded it this year's Academy Award as Best
Foreign Language Film. But then I like a bit of passion, and
Señor Campanella, an Argentinian, certainly has a lot of it.
Secret is a sort of cinematic equivalent of an
Argentinian tango, itself full of semi-stylized passion as well
as a representation of it.
Set in the present and, in flashback, in the mid-1970s at a
time of a gathering storm of political violence in Argentina that
was to break soon afterwards, the movie is both a whodunnit --
though without, except incidentally, the expected political
dimension -- and a love story. After the rape and murder of a
beautiful young wife (Carla Quevedo), the investigating officer,
Benjamín Esposito (Ricardo Darín), finds that he is both unable
to solve the case and unable to forget it. Years later, when he
retires, he tries to write the story as a novel, but he keeps
changing details and inserting into the story himself and his
long-held but secret passion for his beautiful boss in the public
prosecutor's office, Irene Menéndez Hastings (Soledad Villamil),
who is recognized by everyone as a woman out of his league. When
he returns to the office to refresh his memory about the case, he
also re-establishes contact with her, and the two of them find
that the solution to the mystery poses more than one sort of
danger to their lives.
The themes of the picture are thus time and memory and
storytelling as well as passion, which is something quite
different for each of the main characters. Yet each shares an
equal horror of what the film poses as passion's opposite, "a
life full of nothing." Morales (Pablo Rago), the husband of the
murdered woman, sees his life without her in this way and
believes that the only proper revenge on her killer would be to
see to it that his life was full of nothing. "It's as if
his wife's death just left him there, stuck in time, forever,"
says Esposito pityingly, even as he is fascinated by the man's
undying devotion -- his passion for the dead woman. "You should
put it behind you, take it from me," Morales advises Esposito on
his new quest for the killer. "It's my life."
But Esposito contradicts him. "No, it's my life too. Your
love for the woman -- I never saw it again." Morales's agonizing
memories are inspirational to Esposito, even though this seems to
both men a basic discourtesy, a kind of social faux
pas.
Yet all is not as it seems, and memory, though we are its
prisoners, is not the nothing these lives are full of. Irene, now
a judge, tells Esposito about his novel, "You have come to the
end of your life and want to look backwards. My whole life has
been lived forward. I can't look back; backwards is out of my
jurisdiction. I declare myself incompetent." Her wish to think of
her past self as somebody else -- "I was another person; it was
another world" -- is just one of the ways in which the film's
characters try to escape from their past and "leave it behind"
them. In the end, "memories are all we end up with," says the
permanently bereaved Morales to Esposito. "At least choose the
good ones." But memory is all bound up with passion, and escape
is no more possible for him than it is for anyone else.
It would be hard for me to imagine many films, foreign or
domestic, better calculated to appeal to those of a romantic
nature. One word of warning, however. Early on in the film there
is a horrific image of the raped and murdered woman which even
today's jaded moviegoers may find shocking. That shock is, it
might be argued, integral to everything that follows, but I am
not so inclined to let that be an excuse for it as others might
be. There's quite enough baring of emotional secrets in the film
without its having to turn to physical ones for
reinforcements.
About the Author
James Bowman, our movie and culture critic, is a resident scholar at the Ethics and Public Policy Center. He is the author of Honor: A History and Media Madness: The Corruption of Our Political Culture, both published by Encounter Books.
Roughcoat| 4.19.10 @ 11:46AM
I would never say "what tosh."
duplicator| 4.19.10 @ 3:04PM
I would never say it.
band bags| 4.20.10 @ 2:56AM
I would never say it.
jfdsjk| 7.1.10 @ 1:30AM
beijing massage shanghai girl