"Artists create out of a sense of desolation. The spirit of creation is a excruciating, intricate exploration from within the soul." – El Greco (Domenikos Theotokopoulos)
We watched the 2007 film “El Greco” at the weekend, by Yannis Smaragdis starring Nick Ashdon, Juan Diego Botto, Laia Marull and Dimitra Matsouka. The film had received some rather controversial reviews and it was interesting to see it and make up our minds about it. Looking at it critically one easily finds fault with it and it can be dismissed as biofiction, which lacks any real depth or true characterisation. On the other hand if one changes one’s perspective, and approaches it without any expectations (and more importantly without prior knowledge of the artist, his work or his times), this film has several saving graces and one can see why it can appeal to a very large number of people.
Firstly, let me put on my tall, silk stovepipe hat of the harsh film critic who is well-versed in the life and times of Domenikos Theotokopoulos, the 16th century artist born in Venetian –occupied Crete, but who through Venice finally made a home for himself in Spain and became one of the most famous and well-regarded artists of all time. Remarkably little is known about he life of El Greco and there a few pieces of documentary evidence that will shed light on his travels and life. The film makes quite a few assumptions and is quite inventive as far as personal details are concerned, so as a biographical work it is closer to fiction than fact. The few indisputable facts about El Greco’s life are surely shown, but around them the tissue of fiction does more to obscure them than to clothe them.
The script is platitudinous to say the least and the two major themes that run through it are freedom (on a national as well as a personal level), and the belief in one’s abilities and personal credos versus on ones imposed by convention or people in power. The struggle of El Greco to establish himself as an artist through his controversial art is counterpointed with his personal relationships. A noble Venetian woman who loves him in Crete become a nun (who later saves him in true deus ex machina style) and the Spanish noblewoman who loves him and bears his son sees his struggle with the church and the establishment as too risky an undertaking and opts (at least initially) for abandoning him (however, to preserve the happy ending, they are reunited, at the conclusion of the film). El Greco’s relationship with Cardinal Niño El Guevara (who portrait he painted in magnificent red robes and rather fetching spectacles) is made much of. On the one hand, there is an almost passionate and perverse courting on the Cardinal’s part (although the homosexual undertones are never explicitly stated), while on the other, El Greco remains aloof and committed to his art, unwilling to compromise on sexual, religious, artistic or ideological grounds.
The Spanish Inquisition comes in, and in what is supposed to be the climax, El Greco is accused of heresy and blasphemy – his punishment for rejecting the advances of the Cardinal, however, a vision of angels chastens the Cardinal and El Greco’s impassioned (but rather trite speeches) end the film on a joyous and triumphant note. This is more soap opera than a work of art and the costumes and settings look a little more theatrical than realistic.
The music by Vangelis is good and the cinematography OK, but the script has let this production down. No character development, no thoughtfulness about the potentially conflicting situations that could have provided some very powerful scenes between the leads and a rather poor last appearance by Greek veteran actor Sotiris Moustakas (through no fault of his own), who delivers some very mind-numbing lines as El Greco’s teacher, Titian.
Rather a scathing review, wouldn’t you think? Let me take my high hat off and put on my layman’s cap (rather worn and with no pretensions of high-brow aspirations). In this incarnation I could view the film as an enjoyable introduction to a great artist’s life and his art, made approachable by engaging, instantly familiar situations and emotions, one that any person could relate to in an easily ingestible and digestible form. It is colourful, engaging (because of its lack of assumptions about the viewers’ prior knowledge or education) and one that gives a simple direct message. Besides, the good guys win and all is resolved happily in the end.
I must say that I was more harsh than lenient with my personal criticism because of all the hype that I had heard about the film before I saw it. I was expecting much more than the film delivered and besides I knew something about the life and art of Domenikos Theotokopoulos before I saw the film. As my expectations were very high, I was rather disappointed. However, don’t let me put you off seeing, although, be warned and don’t have high expectations. This is a biofiction, costume drama, better suited to a Sunday afternoon DVD session, rather than a special trip into a cinema.
It should be noted that there is an equally flawed 1966 “El Greco”, yet another version of the artist’s life, starting Mel Ferrer in the title role. In this one, the action concentrates on the artist’s Toledo period and his later years. I think overall, one is more likely to be satisfied by a visit to Spain and a view of the master’s incomparable masterpieces in some of the galleries…
No comments:
Post a Comment