Having never seen a picture by this particular director before, but having enjoyed Miranda Otto's performance in LoTR, I gave this movie a chance when I saw in on the Sundance Channel a year or so ago. Since then, I have seen it three more times, and have concluded that even though it does not have a technically typical or logical resolution and plot, it is so rife with talented performances, excellent directing and powerful messages that the seemingly empty conclusion must be overlooked.
It is true that there does not seem to be a clear focus in this film. One is not sure which character to focus on. But unlike other films that are stylistically and objectively similar to this, the message that one is to focus on is quite clear. The plot runs more like a realistic set of events. There isn't always a clear start and finish.
The message, though, I think, is that everything has a consequence. Perhaps this is more conspicuously presented in this film than in real life, with mystical and miraculous happenings, that seems to be what it's creator wishes to say about life. (This synopsis is less to tell the plot, and more the connections) Julie's son, Nicholas, collapses. She doesn't take him to the doctor or a hospital, but instead goes home to discover her husband having an affair. Their relationship is destroyed, while Nick's collapse proves to have been more than an accident; he has contracted cancer. It is clear that Julie's anguish perfects at Henry for his affair, but also at herself for not having taken him to a professional to begin with. Already a loop has formed.
And so her father, a bitter Polish Catholic, in the middle of this presents his Polish mail-order bride, who tells Julie of a Russian Faith Healer, Alexy, who may be able to save her son. He does, and in the process falls in love with Julie. When Julie returns to Canada, she finds that her father's bride has left him alone, though not before leading her son to a complete recovery. As Alexy follows Julie home, and a very passionate affair is begot, Nicholas becomes ill once again. This time, possibly do to his loss of virginity and redirector passion towards Julie, Alexy cannot heal Nick again. Thus Julie has created a similar loop that the film began with, her affair possibly producing the tragedy all over again.
Yet Julie becomes pregnant by Alexy, and returns to Henry, who, we assume, has forgiven her, and we also left to assume that they go on with their lives, doing their best to support Nick's life as long as possible. And so, it seems that the message is that everything is connected. Everything you do in your life begets something else, creates a ripple.
But what is presented by the opening scene is a different interpretation of this message. More specifically, the movie tells us that for every life saved, one cannot be. A small Alexy saves a man incapacitated with pain, but not the already deceased woman. While Nick lived, Julie's marriage did not, and neither did her father's. While Julie's love lived, Nick did not.
This relates to another theme of faith and religion, in that in religion the idea that there are always consequences for are actions is a very important concept. The baptism of her children and ordeal over Julie's wounded Catholicism shows this, as well as the ground of faith by which Julie believes Alexy can heal her son. In faith people believe that what they do for good will produce good in kind. But in love, consequences are not so easily defined. Thus neither Henry nor Julie see the consequences in their affairs. In love, reciprocation is immediate, and one is not acting in the objective of creating consequences or retribution or rewards.
I believe that such complicated messages are well presented in the bare simpleness of Holland's direction, and in the purely fantastic performances. The children's roles are written beautifully in a world of film in which children are merely adults with small voices, and the young actors are astonishingly skillful and talented in their presentation of these roles. Mirando Otto gives a stunning performance, stealing the movie with the believability and passion of her character. Lothaire Bluteau is also quite brilliant, presenting the almost sheepish, yet amazingly gifted Alexy with a natural charm and ease. Willaim Fichtner tackles the difficult role of the supposed "bad guy" with grace, insuring that his character is not taken just for his actions, but is given a depth as well.
All in all, my favorite part of this movie is that no one is the bad guy, and no one is the good guy. they all make mistakes, and that is true in real life. And like adults, they realize there mistakes, and that they are things they must live with. I believe this is a rather excellent movie, when looked at from the right angle.
It is true that there does not seem to be a clear focus in this film. One is not sure which character to focus on. But unlike other films that are stylistically and objectively similar to this, the message that one is to focus on is quite clear. The plot runs more like a realistic set of events. There isn't always a clear start and finish.
The message, though, I think, is that everything has a consequence. Perhaps this is more conspicuously presented in this film than in real life, with mystical and miraculous happenings, that seems to be what it's creator wishes to say about life. (This synopsis is less to tell the plot, and more the connections) Julie's son, Nicholas, collapses. She doesn't take him to the doctor or a hospital, but instead goes home to discover her husband having an affair. Their relationship is destroyed, while Nick's collapse proves to have been more than an accident; he has contracted cancer. It is clear that Julie's anguish perfects at Henry for his affair, but also at herself for not having taken him to a professional to begin with. Already a loop has formed.
And so her father, a bitter Polish Catholic, in the middle of this presents his Polish mail-order bride, who tells Julie of a Russian Faith Healer, Alexy, who may be able to save her son. He does, and in the process falls in love with Julie. When Julie returns to Canada, she finds that her father's bride has left him alone, though not before leading her son to a complete recovery. As Alexy follows Julie home, and a very passionate affair is begot, Nicholas becomes ill once again. This time, possibly do to his loss of virginity and redirector passion towards Julie, Alexy cannot heal Nick again. Thus Julie has created a similar loop that the film began with, her affair possibly producing the tragedy all over again.
Yet Julie becomes pregnant by Alexy, and returns to Henry, who, we assume, has forgiven her, and we also left to assume that they go on with their lives, doing their best to support Nick's life as long as possible. And so, it seems that the message is that everything is connected. Everything you do in your life begets something else, creates a ripple.
But what is presented by the opening scene is a different interpretation of this message. More specifically, the movie tells us that for every life saved, one cannot be. A small Alexy saves a man incapacitated with pain, but not the already deceased woman. While Nick lived, Julie's marriage did not, and neither did her father's. While Julie's love lived, Nick did not.
This relates to another theme of faith and religion, in that in religion the idea that there are always consequences for are actions is a very important concept. The baptism of her children and ordeal over Julie's wounded Catholicism shows this, as well as the ground of faith by which Julie believes Alexy can heal her son. In faith people believe that what they do for good will produce good in kind. But in love, consequences are not so easily defined. Thus neither Henry nor Julie see the consequences in their affairs. In love, reciprocation is immediate, and one is not acting in the objective of creating consequences or retribution or rewards.
I believe that such complicated messages are well presented in the bare simpleness of Holland's direction, and in the purely fantastic performances. The children's roles are written beautifully in a world of film in which children are merely adults with small voices, and the young actors are astonishingly skillful and talented in their presentation of these roles. Mirando Otto gives a stunning performance, stealing the movie with the believability and passion of her character. Lothaire Bluteau is also quite brilliant, presenting the almost sheepish, yet amazingly gifted Alexy with a natural charm and ease. Willaim Fichtner tackles the difficult role of the supposed "bad guy" with grace, insuring that his character is not taken just for his actions, but is given a depth as well.
All in all, my favorite part of this movie is that no one is the bad guy, and no one is the good guy. they all make mistakes, and that is true in real life. And like adults, they realize there mistakes, and that they are things they must live with. I believe this is a rather excellent movie, when looked at from the right angle.