|
Written by JORDAN BRANDES
|
|
Friday, 20 July 2007 |
The hardest part about watching Milos Forman’s newest film is that the plot itself has almost nothing to do with the artist for which the title is named. This is not immediately clear to the viewer however, as the opening credits are blanketed with Goya’s most graphic prints.
| | |
"Goya’s Ghosts"
|
 Entertainment
 Art
Written by: Milos Forman, Jean-Claude Carriere
Directed by: Milos Forman
Starring: Javier Bardem, Natalie Portman, Stellan Skarsgard
|
| | |
Milos Forman, a skilled director who has produced such masterpieces at Amadeus and One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest this time takes us into Spain during the time of the Spanish Inquistion. The church is in full power and eager to oppress all those who seem even remotely against Catholicism. Led by the powerful yet monotone Brother Lorenzo (Javier Bardem) makes a living by giving propaganda speeches for the church preaching the sins of being “a hidden Jew, or worse a Protestant”.
The prime victim of sin in this film is Goya’s (Stellan Skarsgard) muse Ines, played by the eternally beautiful Natalie Portman. Ines is convicted of not eating a meal of pork during an evening at the local inn. When brought in for questioning Ines is not sure why she’s there and by the time she finally does the look on her face is more than enough to show the absurdity of the crime.
Having Portman portray such a character is significant for a number of reasons. First she is by far wonderful in the role. Portman has such range and can tell volumes just by the look in her eye or the smile on her face. But Portman herself is Israeli and Jewish born as well. So having her character be accused of being a secret Jew you can actually see the true, hidden rage that such an anti-Semitic question invokes.
Meanwhile all Goya seems to do is watch from the sidelines never taking action. Throughout the film never seems to focus on any one particular character or plot and key people are non existent for entire portions of the film. There is much talk about this film being compared to last year’s Marie Antoinette a much different film though it contains a lot of the same elements.
Sophia Coppola’s film showed audiences an idealized view of the time period while Forman instead gives them a raw interpretation. Like Goya’s work Forman is going for the truth rather than simple beauty. During a key scene Goya asks one of his friends for feedback on a portrait he has just finished of the Queen mounted on a horse. “There is no question that it is a beautiful painting,” his friend says “but is the Queen really that ugly?” There seems to be a constant battle between the truth as it is and the truth as we choose to see it going on throughout the whole film. Almost everyone in the cast accuses at least one person in the film of being a fake at some point. The only person willing to accept anything at face value and truly appreciate it seems to be Goya himself.
This is a film that is defiantly worth watching though not for the reasons that you would think. If you are looking for an intimate biographical picture about Goya this is not for you. But if you are prepared to watch a very deep film about the trials of the human spirit this is a must see. Powered by AkoComment 2.0! |
