Skip to main content

The Criterion Channel Presents: Close-Up (1990)


Part of the joy of the Criterion Channel is that it gives its subscribers the opportunity to see the sorts of films from filmmakers and cultures they never would have thought of before. I’ve never seen a movie from Iran, but Abbas Kiarostami’s Close-Up was right there. It’s a strange anomaly of a film that’s part documentary part biographical fiction, but with the people involved in the real life story playing themselves –something which is especially fascinating given it’s the story of a con. In 1990, a poor movie fan Hossain Sabzian impersonated famed director Mohsen Makhmalbaf to a wealthy family believing they were cast in his new film, up to and including rehearsing with one of the sons and claiming to use their home as a location shoot. Most interestingly though is that Sabzian appeared to have no further criminal interest in his scam, not intending to rob or harm them, and was merely a passionate cinephile taking advantage of a kind of respect and admiration he never got in his daily life.
Kiarostami documents Sabzian’s trial and his testimony, interviews the man and the family, but takes it a step further by having them re-enact scenes of the case with his own writing. The fact that the two parties were willing to do this speaks rather beautifully to the lack of ill will, and on the family’s part, an empathy they held for Sabzian, who’s not a bad actor in these scenes. It’s not limited to just the figures of the case either, as Kiarostami also involves the journalist who broke the story, the cab driver who drove him to the house (complete with their conversation on movies and culture), and Makhmalbaf himself in the movies’ wonderful closing scenes, meeting Sabzian and brokering peace between him and the family. This blending of reality and cinematic recreation allows Kiarostami to emphasize a story of a man who might have been a filmmaker himself if not prevented by class and means –something Sabzian openly comments on in one of his many insightful testimonies. Through this filtered look at a real life event, we see subtle criticisms of Iranian society, disparity, and even prejudices.
Like was common of other films to come out of the Iranian New Wave of the 90’s, Close-Up is interested in breaking down the conventions of cinema, or simply not editing out that which any other movie would. In the last sequence for instance, the sound cuts in and out, and you hear Kiarostami directing his crew as they follow Makhmalbaf and Sabzian on a motorbike. This, and the deliberate experimentation with a documentary format reminds me a lot of Orson Welles’ F For Fake, one of my favourites, and it certainly emphasizes Kiarostami as a man with a vision and a compellingly unnatural way of telling stories.

Criterion Recommendation: Memories of Murder (2003)

With all the talk around Bong Joon-ho’s Parasite (and my finally getting to see it by the end of the week), how about we begin inducting his films into the Criterion Collection -starting with his first great movie, Memories of Murder. I talk about in slightly more detail here, but it’s the story of the first serial killing spree in South Korean history, and the efforts of a local provincial detective (Song Kang-ho) and a big city cop (Kim Sang-kyung) to find the twisted individual. It’s a film very much in the vein of a David Fincher thriller but with touches of Bong’s trademark style; and while it may not be as brilliant as his later movies like The Host and Snowpiercer, it’s one of the best true crime films I’ve ever seen: haunting, emotional, unpredictable, and even weirdly beautiful.

Support me on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/JordanBosch
Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/Jordan_D_Bosch
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Strange History of the American Spoof Movie

Parody movies have been around for a lot longer than we tend to think of them. Even from the earliest days of Hollywood there were movies meant to satirize a particular subject or genre. In the silent era, Buster Keaton was responsible for a few. And in the early sound era, almost as soon as the monster pictures took off did you see comic versions of them -Abbott and Costello hosting a few. But parody movies tended to be subtle for most of cinema history, or parody came in conjunction with another goal of the comedy. It really wasn’t until the 1980s and 90s that it took off and became popularly understood. And there is perhaps a line to be drawn to the counterculture comedy explosion that began in the 1970s through avenues like  Saturday Night Live , which frequently parodied from even its earliest years popular movies and cultural properties of the time. But that is still a way’s back. To my generation though, ‘parody movie’ is perhaps a less known term than the more blunt ‘s...
1 comment
Read more

A Stylish and Charmingly Reinvented David Copperfield

The Personal History, Adventures, Experience and Observation of David Copperfield the Younger of Blunderstone Rookery (Which He Never Meant to Publish on Any Account)  is the most important book Charles Dickens ever wrote. It is not the most famous or influential by any means (that would of course be A Christmas Carol ), but it is the book that is the purest expression of the authors’ style, identity, and worldview. It is his most personal work, semi-autobiographical in its story of the chronology from infancy to adulthood of a character who overcomes great loss and hardships to find a fulfilling life as a writer. To read David Copperfield  is to understand Dickens himself. Armando Iannucci knew this when he decided to make a new adaptation of the novel for a twenty-first century audience. He also knew that Dickens adaptations are ubiquitous at this point. Films are a bit rarer, but every few years a new television adaptation rears its head to keep the authors’ unique world an...
Post a Comment
Read more

Notes on the Title Cards of The Lord of the Rings

It might be sacrilege for one who both considers The Lord of the Rings  trilogy to be one of the greatest triumphs of cinema and has been an avid lover of the films since adolescence, to declare that the original theatrical cuts of the films are better than the much beloved extended editions. Easily it’s my most controversial opinion regarding these movies. Don’t get me wrong, I do like the extended editions quite a lot, especially as someone who just enjoys spending time in that universe. They flesh it out more, add extra flavour, and in increasing the length by about an hour really emphasize the epic quality of these films. But I find that the original cuts are generally more cleanly paced, more seamlessly edited, and much more accessible to audiences. All the stuff there is to love about The Lord of the Rings  is there in the original versions, the plethora of new and extended scenes merely add to that for fans. And of those, they fall into three camps for me: 1....
14 comments
Read more