In his lecture "On Other Spaces" (Des espaces
autres) in 967, Michel Foucault uses an interesting concept: "heterotopias
of deviation" or in the literature: "heterotopias of deviation".
This concept is innovative in that it provides a framework
for understanding how modern societies manage and control individuals who
deviate from established norms through specific spatial arrangements. In
Foucault's theoretical framework, heterotopias are real places that exist
within society but function as "counter-spaces", simultaneously
reflecting, questioning and reversing other places within a culture. Unlike
utopias, which are idealized but non-existent spaces, heterotopias are real
physical spaces that function according to their own rules and systems.
Foucault argues that primitive societies had "crisis heterotopias", sacred
or forbidden places reserved for individuals in crisis (adolescents,
menstruating women, the elderly) according to their society. In modern society,
these have largely been replaced by heterotopias of deviance, designed to
accommodate individuals who deviate from established norms.
These spaces are characterized by a few key features:
They harbor individuals whose behavior deviates from the
norm.
They operate under their own system of rules and power
relations.
They maintain strict boundaries between inside and outside.
They often have both punitive and rehabilitative functions.
They reflect society's attitudes towards deviance and
normality.
They can be institutional spaces such as psychiatric
hospitals, prisons, nursing homes, rehabilitation centers, correctional
facilities, homeless shelters, addiction treatment centers; social spaces such
as immigrant neighborhoods, ghettoized areas, living spaces of marginalized
communities and even slum hotels...
Within heterotopias of deviance, power relations are
particularly visible and intense. These spaces embody systems of surveillance,
control and normalization that aim to change behavior and produce "docile
bodies", what Foucault calls "disciplinary power".
Cuban writer Guillermo Rosales (1946-1993) is one of the
most original and tragic figures of 20th century Latin American literature.
Rosales struggled with schizophrenia throughout his life, fled the revolution,
lived in exile and eventually committed suicide. His most important work
"Boarding Home" (Spanish: "La casa de los náufragos") is
considered one of the masterpieces of modern Cuban literature...
"Boarding Home", published in 1987, is Rosales'
most important surviving work. The novel tells the story of a
semi-autobiographical character named William Figueras and his experiences in a
Miami nursing home. Figueras, like Rosales, is a fugitive from Cuba and a
mentally ill writer.
An attentive reader will notice that the author has taken
the "heterotopias of deviation" that Foucault once referred to as
"heterotopias of deviation" as both social texture and dramatic
backdrop for his novel. The novel is characterized by its use of simple and
minimalist language, short and punchy sentences in the style of Hemingway, a
direct and partly brutal realism, interior monologues and dream sequences.
Perhaps because of these characteristics, the novel was
awarded the "Letras de Oro" prize by a jury that included Octavio Paz
when it was published...
It was this damp and profound novel that inspired the first
feature film by French filmmaker Joan Chemla. I realize that the introduction
is long, but please allow me to give a little more background, because the
phenomenon called "first film" is worth a little chit-chat!
The director in his purest form: First movie
From Nolan, the golden boy of Hollywood, to Tarantino, the
rebel spirit of independent cinema... Do you know what they all have in common?
Yes, you guessed it: That unsettling, exciting first movie experience,
accompanied by sleepless nights and endless coffee.
Have a conversation with a director, ask them about their
first movie. Their eyes will either light up or they will say with a slight
sigh "oh those days...". Because the first film is the most naked,
the most vulnerable, but perhaps the purest form of a director. Just like first
love, clumsy but passionate, flawed but sincere...
Let's remember Nuri Bilge Ceylan; he stepped into the world
of short films with "Koza", but dived into deep waters with
"Kasaba". Using his own family as actors, working with minimal crew
and equipment... Thinking about it now, perhaps the economic necessities of
those days laid the foundations of the minimalist style we praise today.
"I have no money, but I have an idea!"... Is there
any young director who hasn't said this phrase? Christopher Nolan shot his
first movie "Following" on weekends. Why? Because everyone was busy
during the week! The crew was more like a group of friends than a team behind
the camera. But that movie became the business card of Nolan, who today shoots
movies with multi-million budgets.
Everyone knows how Tarantino made "Reservoir
Dogs"; he wrote the script while working in a video store and went door to
door until Harvey Keitel noticed it. Now imagine Tarantino, a video store
employee, waiting in the producer's office. Who knows what was going through
his mind? But that restless young man is today one of the most original voices
in cinema.
Do you know the most common trap young directors fall into?
Trying to fit everything into one movie. As if they will never make a movie
again... They try to cram all their ideas, dreams and stories into one movie! That's
why first films are often either too ambitious or too personal.
Greta Gerwig's "Lady Bird", for example, is a
semi-autobiographical first movie. Or how interesting was Robert Eggers'
"The Witch", the guy literally reconstructed 1630s New England in his
first movie! Isn't that crazy? But this madness, this courage, this naivety...
That's what makes the first movies so special.
Now, of course, everything has changed. You can shoot a
movie with a smartphone in your pocket. Sean Baker's "Tangerine" was
shot on an iPhone, for example. But this time there is another problem: Anyone
can make a movie! Digital democracy is great, but standing out from the crowd...
That's the real challenge.
In short, the first movie is actually a director's
manifesto. It is the manifesto of young people who sometimes shoot commercials
or make wedding videos for a living, but at the same time struggle to realize
that project they call "my movie". Sometimes clumsy, sometimes
brilliant, but always sincere.
And maybe that's the most beautiful thing, the purity of
that first step, the excitement of that first love. Just like Truffaut's
"400 Blows" or Demirkubuz's "C Block"... Sometimes a first
movie is not only a beginning, but also a masterpiece.
For this reason, those who have a close relationship with
the history of cinema always keep an eye on the first films of new directors.
Because behind those nervous, excited and passionate first steps, perhaps the
great masters of tomorrow are hidden.
French director Joan Chemla's "Seeing Your Heart"
(originally titled Si tu voyais son coeur) is about all the above-mentioned
issues. First of all, it is the director's first feature film. Chemla has an
interesting career path. After his early work in law and journalism, he wrote,
produced and directed his first short film Mauvaise Route in 2008. He then
directed Dr. Nazi, based on a short story by Charles Bukowski (for which he won
the Canal+ award at the Clermont-Ferrand film festival) and L'homme à la cervelle
d'or, based on a short story by Alphonse Daudet.
Her first feature film "If You Could See Your Heart or
Being able to see your heart" (S i tu voyais son cœur), which we will
analyze in detail in a moment, premiered in the Platform competition at the
2017 Toronto International Film Festival. Cameron Bailey, artistic director of
this festival, said, "Joan Chemla is someone who will have a long career
as a maker of personal films. There is an individual stamp here." He spoke
highly of the French director.
Let's talk about the movie, which has surprising depths...
Joan Chemla's first feature film in the director's chair,
"If You Saw His Heart" in English, is a loose adaptation of Cuban
writer Guillermo Rosales' novel "Halfway House". Of course, it is
possible to say that it is a brave experiment that hovers on the borders of Film
Noir and romantic melodrama. In terms of acting performances, it offers a
narrative that swims in the dark waters of guilt, loneliness and the desire for
self-destruction, especially through the character of Daniel, brought to life
by Gael García Bernal's impressive performance.
Oh, hotel rooms!
Here's a very brief synopsis: After the accidental death of
his best friend, Daniel finds himself in the Metropole Hotel, a haven for
vagrants and lost souls. Filled with guilt, Daniel slowly sinks into the
violence that surrounds him. His encounter with Francine sheds light on his life.
And let's look at the details.
The movie begins with Daniel, ostracized from the Roman
community after the death of his best friend, taking refuge in one of the worst
motels in the city. Chemla has an interesting cinematography. At times its lyrical
visual aesthetic is reminiscent of Kar-wai's In the Mood for Love and 2046, at
others it wanders through the slums like Jarmusch's depiction of America out of
Parliament Blue in Stranger Than Paradise. The French director manages to
present the ghettos of Marseille as an essential element of the story, rather
than a setting for the movie. From a character perspective, Daniel's story,
which intersects with the fragile Francine character played by Marine Vacth, is
told in a Bukowski-like atmosphere.
Much of the film takes place in this bleak location, perhaps
a veritable hell on earth, contrasting with the beauty of Marseille, which is
often used as a backdrop in cinema as a city bathed in sun and sea. I think the
director is not trying to give the viewer a moment of tranquility, but rather
to reveal the inner chaos of the character who, while agreeing to stay in a
marginal refuge run by a sadistic hotelier who takes advantage of the
loneliness and poverty of his guests, is confronted with the violence of the
gypsy gangsters he is trying to save. On the other hand, the title hides a very
dark reality, so much so that viewers who are not used to this kind of darkness
may find it difficult to follow the journey of a character who from the very
beginning wants to hurt himself and suffer as much as possible. Even worse, the
viewer will certainly find it difficult to understand the reasons for such inconsistent
behavior of a character who expresses himself (very) little.
The character of Francine is perhaps the only Francine character in the movie that is faithful to the novel, and perhaps the only character in the movie that is left faithful to the novel.
While watching the movie, Necip Fazıl's famous poem
"Hotel Rooms" came to my mind.
"Your aches and pains pulse on the bare wall,
Nail wounds, nail wounds.
**
Weep, the unfamiliar, the voiceless, the dying,
In hotel rooms, in hotel rooms!..."
One of the most important features of the film is the way
director Chemla twists chronology and uses a jumpy time flow. Obviously, from
the very opening sequence of the movie, he consciously prefers a fragmented
narrative that makes it difficult for the viewer to navigate. However, this
stylistic preference sometimes reaches to the extent of undermining the overall
depth of the movie. Despite its success in creating a visual feast and
atmosphere, the movie falls short in terms of character development and emotional
connection.
Obviously, the lead actor deserves a little more praise. Bernal's
performance stands out as one of the strongest aspects of the movie. The actor,
who can tell a story even with his eyes, manages to add depth to the character
he draws with a minimal approach. The line "If you saw his heart",
which is the title of the movie, gains meaning with Bernal's performance.
Let's take the musical palette. Composer Gabriel Yared's
score for the first film (it's unclear how much he grasped the spirit of the
work) is nothing more than a mediocre melody. The real jewel of the movie,
however, is the eerie performance of Karim Leklou as the hotelier who wanders
the gloomy corridors of the hotel, dancing in the shadows of violence and
without a shred of sympathy. The dark atmosphere created by this terrifying
character gets into the bones of the viewer. Leklou's presence breathes a bit
of life into the slow-moving and dark script, while offering a multi-layered
perspective beyond the limited perspective of the main character who flounders
in his mental turmoil.
Risky chronology courage!
As we mentioned before, the movie has a non-linear
chronology, which makes it a matter of time before the audience loses its
attention and is suddenly thrown out of the story. Because Chemra gives no
clues other than tiny visual details to help the audience as she jumps back and
forth in time. A scar, some duct tape, etc...
The protagonists are clearly inspired by Rosales' novel.
However, the caricature-like characterizations of the side characters sometimes
undermine the impact of the movie. For instance, the character of Francine
deserves more depth. This typology, which is very close to the characters in
Demirkubuz's Innocence, somehow seems like an afterthought in the story. Likewise,
Daniel's emotional awakening, which symbolically marks his coming out of his
depression... It looks like a dramatic patch in the movie!
If we had analyzed the film in depth, it would have opened
up much richer valleys. The film tries to touch the psychological depths of its
marginalized characters by referencing classics such as One Flew Over the
Cuckoo's Nest and The Shining. And although the references made due to such formal
concerns in the movie are not always successful, it is still possible to see it
as a brave effort!
Yes, maybe not a masterpiece, but for all its flaws, "If
you saw his heart" is much more than a first movie. It is bold, striking
and has a story that you carry with you even after the movie is over. Maybe it
doesn't draw the concepts of guilt and redemption enough, but it is a dark
world of lost souls... And a warning, if you are prone to depressive moods, it
would be in your best interest to stay away from this movie!
