A Separation (Asghar Farhadi, 2011)

[elixir]

http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb187/ears550/A-Separation-1024x685-1.jpg

You know, I would attach the trailer, but I'm honestly not a fan of it at all...it's really a film where you should go into it not knowing too much. Anyhow, this film deserves it's own thread. Here's part of what I wrote about it on another site, keeping it spoiler-free.

I've come to see A Separation as a film of different vantage points. One might say "separate" point of views, which are forcibly put into contact with one another. Often seen through windows and encased in frames, characters are often cornered into making choices that reflect upon their moral beliefs and judicial values, among other things. The reason why the deft twists and turns the narrative takes (which I don't wish to spoil) somehow registers as organic instead of contrived is due to the detailed characterizations that explore the actions of all those involved, whether they be major players or minor parts in the story. Farhadi thus shows the different ways characters view the ever-worsening and increasingly destructive situations they are put in, with distinctions of class, gender, and religion driving much of the conflict, sometimes all at the same time. Where Farhadi's humanism shines is not simply in detailing the differences among the characters (though it's clear that everyone has their reasons), but in his depiction of the similarities inherent in them: they yearn for integrity but are capable of deception, and even if they ultimately wish for the good of others, their selfishness causes them to, sometimes willfully, inflict harm.

[TripZone]

so last year

[Li Lili]

I, too, saw it last summer.
I agree with you, plus very good acting aswell.

[StanleyK]

I would have to agree that this is a very smartly written movie, which considers every point of view and makes for compelling drama. However, it had two major problems which kept me from loving it. One is the direction, which is at times so inspired (as elixir pointed out, in shooting its characters through windows and frames, or in the opening and closing sequences) but mostly so frustratingly point-and-shoot. The other is that the film feels pretty misogynistic. Long before the movie actually verbalizes it, I got the impression that Simin is ultimately to blame for everything that happens, and that feeling hangs around giving a bitter taste to its proceedings, and the revelation that Razieh kept secret (the way that's handled, in such an otherwise honest film, feels like a bit of a cheat) makes her out to be mostly culpable as well.

[Dukefrukem]

This is my favorite movie of 2011

[soitgoes...]

The other is that the film feels pretty misogynistic. This seems like a weird criticism considering that the film takes place in a society that is largely misogynistic.

[Derek]

This seems like a weird criticism considering that the film takes place in a society that is largely misogynistic.

Which is precisely the reason she kept the secret in the first place...

Also, I saw nothing "point-and-shoot" about the direction. I agree it's not often the highlight, but has a very effective use of the handheld, in terms of giving it a sense of immediacy, and isn't simply shot-countershot w/no camera movement, which is what I think of when I hear point-and-shoot.

[Watashi]

Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol (Bird, 2011) *½

What the shit is this.

[StanleyK]

This seems like a weird criticism considering that the film takes place in a society that is largely misogynistic.

It kinda felt like it was perpetrating that misogyny rather than making a point on it, mostly by making it so easy for the women to be blamed for everything.


Also, I saw nothing "point-and-shoot" about the direction. I agree it's not often the highlight, but has a very effective use of the handheld, in terms of giving it a sense of immediacy, and isn't simply shot-countershot w/no camera movement, which is what I think of when I hear point-and-shoot.

There are a whole lot of passages that are indeed just shot-reverse shot and no fun to look at.

I do wish I liked this movie more than I did; it has enough greatness in it that I'm more than willing to eventually rewatch it and see if these complaints go away.

[soitgoes...]

It kinda felt like it was perpetrating that misogyny rather than making a point on it, mostly by making it so easy for the women to be blamed for everything.By showing life in a misogynistic culture as being misogynistic? It isn't perpetrating anything. Iranian culture is more oppressive towards women then men. Showing it any other way would be moving away from the realism Farhadi was striving for, and instead giving the viewer something closer to idealism. It isn't the fault of the filmmaker for depicting the faults of society accurately. Should I find fault with Killer of Sheep because life isn't fair to the black people living in Watts, and Barnett does nothing to show the viewer any different?

[Derek]

What the shit is this.

I was thinking the same thing through much of the movie...


By showing life in a misogynistic culture as being misogynistic? It isn't perpetrating anything. Iranian culture is more oppressive towards women then men. Showing it any other way would be moving away from the realism Farhadi was striving for, and instead giving the viewer something closer to idealism. It isn't the fault of the filmmaker for depicting the faults of society accurately.

Plus, it does such a fantastic job of examining all the moral perspectives and holding all the major characters as culpable to some degree. I can't fathom how anyone could watch this and feel its pinning the blame on the woman rather than shower her action and everything that follows as a reflection of a sexist, oppressive culture.


Should I find fault with Killer of Sheep because life isn't fair to the black people living in Watts, and Barnett does nothing to show the viewer any different?

It's also an anti-sheep film as well. Not cool, Mr. Burnett, not cool.

[Watashi]

I was thinking the same thing through much of that movie...

Funny. I was thinking how awesome Brad Bird was.

[Derek]

Funny. I was thinking how awesome Brad Bird was.

Right, but you do that while you're sifting through his garbage too.

[Watashi]

Right, but you do that while you're sifting through his garbage too.

I think this is a bannable offence.

Raiders... you know what to do.

[Ezee E]

All these top tens and hardly any discussion at all? Bullocks.

This is good, but I think the raves heightened my expectations. The energy and melodrama is fantastic for the first 70-80 minutes of the movie, but for me, it started to get a little tiresome and overdone after that.

[Morris Schæffer]

I need to see this also. Because I feel I might like it, but above all, to know whether it's better than Belgian's nominee Bullhead.

Can't wait to hear some Match cut opinions on that.:)

[Ezee E]

I question the idea that this was "boringly directed." At least Stanley commented on the opening and closing shots, but this movie is mostly dialog-driven. There's some heavy blocking of the actors throughout the movie, with characters coming into rooms, leaving rooms, how they are framed within the room. This is definitely not point and shoot.

Maybe not framed as well as something that Mike Nichols would do in his heavy dialog-drive/dramatic movies, but it's certainly no Apatow.

[Derek]

I question the idea that this was "boringly directed."

Who said it was boringly directed? It's a very well-directed film.

[Ezee E]

Who said it was boringly directed? It's an very well-directed film.
Stanley basically says just that.

[Pop Trash]

I wasn't into this for the first half-hour or so, and thought I might be one of the few detractors on here, but once it went along, the whole thing just got more and more compelling. The screenplay is ridiculously tight and interesting. The two leads are great. I guess I could see why "point-and-shoot" direction might get lobbed at it, but I think there was a good use of space. Doors are used well and conversations are always held with a paranoia of who else might hear them.

Consider the final scene: in a movie that is so predicated on who hears what and what alibis were around to hear if they heard what, we as the audience are ultimately cut off (like the parents) from the final conversation.

[lovejuice]

Even though 2012 is still young, if this doesn't end up as my favorite movie of the yeal, I'll be much surprised.

[Li Lili]

Any of you has seen his previous films ?
I saw About Elly, his previous film (2009), with all the same cast, almost set in a same place during all the film, lots of dialog, again very well acted.
I guess the ones who didn't like A Separation won't like About Elly.

[Dukefrukem]

Any of you has seen his previous films ?
I saw About Elly, his previous film (2009), with all the same cast, almost set in a same place during all the film, lots of dialog, again very well acted.
I guess the ones who didn't like A Separation won't like About Elly.

No but added to queue!!

edit: Errrr I guess not since Netflix doesn't have it.

[Boner M]

Taut, morally complex, superbly writted/acted blah blah blah. Came with perhaps unreasonably high expectations so I was left a little less affected than otherwise, but I'm sure a second viewing would benefit.

The only real misstep I felt was the sleight-of-hand regarding the omission of the car accident that might've started Razier's miscarriage. Any reason to keep it a last-act revelation? Seemed a little too 'gotcha'.

StanleyK's claims of misogyny are bizarre.

[Li Lili]

No but added to queue!!

edit: Errrr I guess not since Netflix doesn't have it.

argh! I think it got an award at the Berlinale, something like a Silver Bear, so maybe one day...

[Adam]

The only real misstep I felt was the sleight-of-hand regarding

the omission of the car accident that might've started Razier's miscarriage.

Any reason to keep it a last-act revelation? Seemed a little too 'gotcha'.

To keep you on the same footing as the daughter in regards to siding with either parent? Maybe to absolve the father of the actual guilt right away would've made the mother's machinations with her daughter seem all the more dirty to the audience? Also a lot of the film's momentum, which is one of its best assets imo, comes from getting information in bits and pieces. I think you're underrating what a different film this would be if you see her get sideswiped or whatever when it happened. And anyway don't a lot of movies play it that way - Where you're only allowed to know as much as the main characters know at a given time in the narrative?

[Boner M]

Yeah it's not so much an issue on reflection (hence I've added the extra 1/2 star to my rating). Just found the cut from dad across the road w/ Razier on the other side to the group of 'em playing foosball a little bumpy at the time (I, err, actually wondered for a second if I was watching a flashback during the latter scene).

[Boner M]

Interesting tidbit from Sicinski's review (http://cinema-scope.com/wordpress/web-archive-2/issue-49/currency-a-separation-asghar-farhadi-iran/):


To wit: in order to be selected as Iran’s submission for the Oscars, A Separation had to garner a recommendation from the nine-member Farabi Cinema Foundation, a para-governmental arts-and-culture administration. Anyone concerned about the nefarious double-dealings of the MPAA should check out the language on the Farabi website which, remember, reflects the Islamist apparatchiks at their most benign. Farabi describes itself as having saved Iranian cinema from the “mystic cinema” of “the first decade of the 80s” [sic], when “the dominating aspects of the films produced by Andrei Tarkovsky and Sergei Paradjanov” as well as “leftist revisionists” essentially crippled the glorious cinema of Iran. (Where Is the Friend’s Home? [1987]; The Cyclist [1987]; The Tenants [1986]; Canary Yellow [1988]. I think we all remember those dark days!) “Such films,” say the Farabis, “repelled the spectators mainly choosing cinema to spend one to two hours having fun.”

[DavidSeven]

This is a brilliant movie. To me, it explores moral complexity with the kind of depth and nuance that only great novels seem to achieve. Masterfully plotted and emotionally devastating. Certainly among the best of the last several years. A new favorite for me.

[baby doll]

Shameless plug for a blog post (http://lesamantsreguliers.wordpress.c om/2012/02/26/anatomy-of-a-miscarriage-a-separation/) I wrote six months ago.

[Yxklyx]

This was a very good movie but WTF happened at the end there?

First off, the last few scenes totally contradict two previous scenes. The story is setup to go in one direction and then does a 180. It's like there are scenes missing or the ending was changed by the studio.

The second issue I have is that throughout the film the two husbands are portrayed in shades of grey (for the most part) but those last few scenes totally throw that all out the window and we couldn't end with a more black and white comparison. More frustrating is that the poor man is the one wallowing in sin while the rich is portrayed as virtuous without question. I feel that the director is either pandering to this movie's potential viewers or that in Iran, being poor is really considered a sin and looked down upon ruthlessly.

[DavidSeven]

How does the ending undo the lying, stubborness and blatant self-interest exhibited by the film's protagonist? I don't think the goal is to portray all the sides as moral equals. It's more about digging into our moral judgments of these characters as an audience given their unique circumstances and how those judgments are so easily shifted as more details, which seem so inconsequential in other contexts, are revealed. I really don't think the film portrays any character as "virtuous without question" by the ending, and I'm surprised you came away with that reading. I can't even fathom how you came to interpret the film as "looking down" on the poor.

[Yxklyx]

Throughout the movie we can empathize with all the characters to some extent - it plays like a Shakespearean tragedy with Fate the main villain - then comes the end...

The scene where the rich dad tells the virtuous daughter to return from the car if she thinks he should pay the money. She doesn't return - 1000 karma points for rich dad!

Next scene we have the poor woman tell the rich woman that she was hit by a car the day before the miscarriage. The poor woman was either lying the whole time or she's an imbecile - I would go with the former. Her entire character has been assassinated by this new revelation - we can no longer have any empathy for her - at all.

Now, it would seem that the rich mom has decided to betray her promise to the poor woman and tell her husband the situation - which is how they end up in the final scene. There's no other explanation for his change of heart - in his previous scene his non-paying stand was cemented by his daughter's inaction. So, the rich mom broke her promise but her story arc was a bit different than the other's - she can be forgiven for this.

Now we come to the last sequence of scenes. The poor father is now willing to commit a great sin by having his wife lie on the Koran. Then, to top it off he assaults his wife! (there were hints about this before but we could always give him the benefit of the doubt). His character has now been assassinated! We can no longer empathize with him either.

...and to drive the whole point home we now have him vandalize the rich man's car - to physically show that the rich couple were the victims throughout the film.

I don't see how you can say anything good about the poor couple at the end. They are in the end painted as decadent opportunists with no redeeming qualities - totally unlike how they are portrayed for most of the film.

[elixir]

Throughout the movie we can empathize with all the characters to some extent - it plays like a Shakespearean tragedy with Fate the main villain - then comes the end...

The scene where the rich dad tells the virtuous daughter to return from the car if she thinks he should pay the money. She doesn't return - 1000 karma points for rich dad!

Next scene we have the poor woman tell the rich woman that she was hit by a car the day before the miscarriage. The poor woman was either lying the whole time or she's an imbecile - I would go with the former. Her entire character has been assassinated by this new revelation - we can no longer have any empathy for her - at all.

Now, it would seem that the rich mom has decided to betray her promise to the poor woman and tell her husband the situation - which is how they end up in the final scene. There's no other explanation for his change of heart - in his previous scene his non-paying stand was cemented by his daughter's inaction. So, the rich mom broke her promise but her story arc was a bit different than the other's - she can be forgiven for this.

Now we come to the last sequence of scenes. The poor father is now willing to commit a great sin by having his wife lie on the Koran. Then, to top it off he assaults his wife! (there were hints about this before but we could always give him the benefit of the doubt). His character has now been assassinated! We can no longer empathize with him either.

...and to drive the whole point home we now have him vandalize the rich man's car - to physically show that the rich couple were the victims throughout the film.

I don't see how you can say anything good about the poor couple at the end. They are in the end painted as decadent opportunists with no redeeming qualities - totally unlike how they are portrayed for most of the film.
Speak for yourself, man. That anyway can come away looking at this film like this is pretty baffling to me. Isn't it obvious that so much of what you deem as morally reprehensible behavior is rooted in societal dysfunction, which is so often a result of issues in class and gender. Anyway, the father's relationship with the daughter--that alone should be enough to throw any concerns about who's seen as coming out as "better" in the end anyway--not that I think this is really the right way to look at things. I still feel empathy or sympathy or something for them--and for all the characters, really.