Reviews

Amazing feat: at the age of 90 Andrzej Wajda is as convincing as he was at the age of 50! Exceptional cinematography: Marek Edelman as excellent as ever. Outstanding acting: Bogoslaw Linda a good bet for best acting. A very good script: keeping balance between the inevitably highbrow dialogues on art and unexpected turns of action. And example for this can be the end of a potential "love affair", which does not end on a romantic note but strikes hard with the brutal abducting of a beautiful girl. Who, by the way, is not the central romantic character. On the contrary, the "great love" remains invisible and is only made romantically visible by white flowers that turn blue. What could more lyrically stress the importance of color in life? By the way, that end of the "love story" is not a harsh rejection, as it may seem, but rather proves that the artist was really fond of the young girl and, nobly, would not allow her to wretch her life at his side.

The film is about the cruelty of the Stalinist period and how it intervened and interfered in the private lives of the common citizen and all the more so in the sphere of art, which "had to serve the people and the final victory of socialism". There are no throats being cut, people being shot or hanged. No spanking. Everything takes place in and "orderly way", for strict rules must be followed. Or perhaps only almost always! This reminds us of Kieslowski's film about killing or the thick atmosphere of Arthur Koestler's "Darkness at noon". Little by little art, i.e. the protagonist, is being suffocated. It is like cutting his veins, but not at once, slowly, in slow motion. Let him bleed to death, but "naturally". That was really a very hard time and Andrzej Wajda knows what he is talking about, for he experienced it "on his own skin", as you say in Polish. A symbolic image summarizes the pic: the window in the artist's dwelling is suddenly veiled by a red banner. A painter can somehow bear poverty, but can he survive without light? Brushes, paint? Wajda's choice of the actor (Boguslaw Linda) to embody Wladyslaw Strzeminski, one of the great Polish artists and art professors of that period, was fundamental to the artistic value of the picture. Bearing also in mind the fact that he had to play a cripple, who had lost two limbs, certainly made his acting even more daunting. And the outcome is certainly impressive.

Another factor that helps sooth the dreariness of the artist's predicaments is the strong presence of the teenager actress (Bronislawa Zamachowska) who plays his daughter. Her seemingly matter of fact reactions to reality and only rare expressions of deeper feelings function as a balance between the drama we witness and the everyday chores or the mere sipping of tea. "There are holes in my shoes" or "You smoke too much". His adoring students, on the other hand, may represent what was left of hope in those days. Their solidarity with the aging, crippled professor was an omen of better times to come, for who can defeat youth? And who can defeat art? The material shabbiness of those times, when "all were equal, but some were more equal than others", with food rationing, very poor dwellings etc. is shown in detail. Some viewers used to cinematic tangibility may not appreciate some of Wajda's discreet, very subtle hints and symbolic images, but, no doubt, in artistic terms this pic is a comeback to his heydays.

Rio Film Festival 8th October, 2016 Tomasz Lychowski

IDA certainly deserves the Oscar for Best cinematography. Especially its spectacular takes that sometimes leave the protagonists nearly out of the screen resembling what in painting we call Decentrism. Pawel Pawlikowski's approach to filmmaking evokes in a way the magic of Bergman's pictures. As regards the screenplay, we, again, come across something unusual and thought provoking. Depending on the nationality of the viewer and his knowledge of the history of those times the film may affect him\her in a different way. A Jew might find that the majority of Poles are anti-Semitic, whereas these will regret that this kind of opinion still prevails. And someone from another country, Brazilian, Belgian or Vietnamese, will not find either. For the "neutral" viewer the story told merely refers to the personal tragedy of the novice Anna and her aunt. And, to some extent, this perspective relieved from the objective-subjective burden of history and ideology, enriches the film's artistic value. Counseled by Mother Superior, the novice Anna (Agata Trzebuchowska) visits her aunt Wanda (Agata Kulesza) before taking her final vows. What would she learn about her past as the orphan who was brought up in the cloister? Would it not have been more natural to let her know why she was there? And why was that postponed for so long? The atmosphere in the cloister is somber, the religious rites ritualistic, phantasmagoric. One wonders how an authentic religious call could thrive on that kind of religious practice. The black and white picture creates this sort of impression and esthetics, stresses Ida's search for identity. Those seem to be the paths of an Ida more abstract than the Ida of the flesh. The all pervading greyness represents neither Heaven nor Hell. Not yet. "Did not Mother Superior tell you anything about me?" asks the aunt. "Nothing", replies Anna. Well, you are Jewish and your real name is Ida. Mother Superior knew of course, that Wanda had been a judge acting in the dreaded communist post war judicial establishment and that the young novice had been saved by a Catholic priest. Before confronting the future, Ida should now face the past. As regards the screenplay, we stumble against some factual inconsistencies. To get drunk and then go to bed with a young man and right afterwards put her novice's dress and veil on again, and all that in the brief interlude of one day and one night, is less than plausible. We do not notice on the part of Ida the slightest hesitation, or dilemma. She passes from one state of mind, from one state of the heart to another with bewildering naturalness and simplicity. Some movie makers do resort to this kind of resource of stretching the point so as to provide an argument for their thesis. Something in the film happens just to prove a point of view, but then one runs the risk of not telling a cohesive story and the artistic quality of the picture is weakened. Pawel Pawlikowski, despite his true and daring talent, still has a long way to go to equal Wajda (Ashes and diamonds), Kieslowski (The trilogy) and Polanski (Knife in the water). These movie makers prove that even madness requires cohesiveness and method (Repulsion by Polanski, A short film about killing by Kieslowski). Kawalerowicz, by the way, with his Mother Joan of the Angels, as well. And now, again, a comment about the plot. A girl is saved by the murderer because "she is so small", but a boy is killed. What makes our blood freeze is the "reason" alleged to kill him. After all, many dark- haired and circumcised boys survived the war protected by Christian families, concealed in orphanages. Among them was Polanski as well. And more, the "small girl" in the movie was the legitimate heiress of the coveted good, not the boy. So what could have been the intention of the plot writer? Lychowski, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil