Feminine Issues #2: Whale Rider

"A long time ago, my ancestor Paikea came to this place on the back of a whale. Since then, in every generation of my family, the first born son has carried his name and become the leader of our tribe... until now."

Release Year: 2002

Country: New Zealand

Genre: Social drama/family drama

Director: Niki Caro

Screenwriter: Niki Caro

Cinematography: Leon Narbey

Music: Lisa Gerrard

Editing: David Coulson

Actors: Keisha Castle-Hughes, Rawiri Paratane, Vicky Haughton, Cliff Curtis

No, Whale Rider is not a story about a kid who befriends a whale and ends up riding it. It is, however, a story of a young girl's struggle to overcome the gender barrier that separates her from the leadership of her tribe. Adapted from Witi Ihimaera's novel of the same name, it is a beautiful look at a Maori community as well as a study on conservative and widespread cultural belief to rejects female leadership. The 'whale rider' itself is an integral historical part of the tribe in this story, who believes that their ancestor comes into the land by riding on a whale's back.

For years, the honor of leading the tribe always falls to the first-born son in a patrilineal line of descendants. However, the tradition is in danger as the son of current leader, Porourangi (Curtis), opted to leave his homeland after the childbirth death of his wife and baby son. The only one left is Porourangi's daughter, Pai (Hughes), who grew into a headstrong teenager and more than willing to step up for the leadership. However, Pai's grandfather Koro (Paratane) refused to acknowledge her as a future leader simply because  the fact that she is a female. 

So, we got our main conflict: a 12-year old girl who wants to prove herself, and her grandfather who is all like, "Uh-huh, you're a sweet girl and I love you, but you can't lead because you're a woman, for god's sake." However, it would be a mistake to assume that gender politic is what Whale Rider all about. It is also about the collision of  familial love and self-ideals, the preservation of traditional cultural values, and the youths' growing apathy toward their own culture. The irony is prevalent in the story: in order to breed a new leader, Koro felt the need to set up cultural courses and edification for the boys in the tribe, while at the same time ignoring the fact that there is already one very qualified and most culturally aware youth very near to him: his granddaughter. 

I like how the film portrays Pai: she is a realistic and likable protagonist. Pai is a natural leader, won an inter-school speech contest, and also eventually becoming very good at taiaha (the local stick-fighting culture), but she also displays occasional moments of emotional weaknesses. She almost gave up due to her grandpa's treatment and choose to go with his father instead. However, eventually her passion and love toward her homeland and its culture won out, and that above all is the highlight of her personality.

 

We are not meant to treat Pai as a mini Wonder Woman, and we are also not meant to treat Koro as the anti-female antagonist. In order to overcome old stereotypes, we don't necessarily have to create other new stereotypes to replace them. This can also be seen from other characters; since there is a message to embrace and love your culture, does it mean that Pai's father is bad for leaving his home for an art career in Germany? No, because he pursued his ideal and what he really believes in. A boy named Hemi (one of Koro's students in the cultural course) eventually lost in a taiaha sparring against Pai, does it automatically make him an inferior human being compared to Pai? No, because Hemi himself could also grow into a great person, having potential and also showing sympathy toward Pai.

The conflict resolution is probably not going to surprise anyone: Pai eventually grown into a more accomplished and greater young woman, winning her grandfather's approval at the end (through a rather sensational, yet beautiful, climax involving a real stranded whale). Yet, a conventional and predictable ending almost does not matter as long as the journey to get there is special enough, and I can say that Whale Rider is full of insightful special moments: the whole sequence when Koro drills mental strength into his taiaha students, the many intimate family scenes that manages to say a lot about each of the family members presented, the sight of Pai practicing traditional songs and dances, and many more.

Pai's ascension into becoming the first female leader of her tribe should not be seen as a show of feminine power overcoming male dominance, as it won't be possible without the influence of many males around him; her father, her uncle, her friend, and even her stubborn yet loving grandfather. There is simply a lot more in Whale Rider than just being a "women can be a leader and kick men's asses!!" narrative: it is a great introduction to those of us unfamiliar with Maori culture, the spectacle is beautiful, and the naturalistic acting is great (Hughes and Paratane in particular, have excellent chemistry). Most of all though, it is a powerful reflection on gender, tribal, and individual identities. If or when I ever have a daughter, I know one of my top priorities would be to show her this movie.

Feminine Issues #1: 4 Months 3 Weeks and 2 Days

"...Let's not talk about this ever again."

Release Year: 2008
Country: Romania
Genre: Social drama
Director: Cristian Mungiu
Screenwriter: Cristian Mungiu
Cinematography: Oleg Mutu
Sound: Constantin Fleancu
Editing: Dana Bunescu
Actors: Anamaria Marinca, Laura Vasiliu, Vlad Ivanov

Unwanted pregnancy and the inevitable dilemma that comes after it is possibly the biggest internal conflict a human being could ever have, and consequently has been used as dramatic plot instrument in countless stories. Somewhat surprisingly though, 4 Months 3 Weeks and 2 Days is not really about the choice of keeping the baby or not. The choice was already made by the pregnant character to abort it, and there is barely any discussion regarding that decision. Instead, it is about the external elements of the abortion process, not on the moral implication of the practice itself or any 'will-I-or-won't-I' internal drama.

Our main protagonist is the blond Otilia Mihartescu (Marinca), the college roommate of Gabriela Dragut (Vasiliu), who is pregnant (the age of her pregnancy is right there on the title, although Gabriela initially lied about it). The two are planning to have abortion on Gabriela by using the service of one Mr. Bebe (Ivanov). However, abortion was an illegal practice during the times of the Communist Romania, and Otilia (who is in charge of all the arrangement) has to pass numerous obstacles as she tries to help her troubled friend.

The most interesting thing about 4 Months is that it focused much more on the pregnant girl's friend. We are put in Otilia's point of view for most of the time, and thus we come to learn how she arranges the meeting with Mr. Bebe, how she struggles with hotel registration, and how she still does all this even though she has important appointment with her boyfriend's family on the same day. In comparison, we hardly know anything about Gabriela, except that she seems to be a mostly clueless girl who is content enough to leave everything in Otilia's hands; we're also not told about the how, where, and with whom she got pregnant. This is an interesting approach, and what separates 4 Months from other movies featuring similar theme.


One of several widely praised Romanian movies in the late 2000s (Death of Mr. Lazarescu, 12:08 East of Bucharest), 4 Months is an artful 'new wave' film with long camera takes, minimalist style, and dense themes. It is also very low on exposition, a sign that best signifies the movie's unconventionality and its respect toward the audience's intelligence. Instead of being told explicitly about the whole context of the story, we are left to logically deduce what is going on by watching the characters' (mostly Otilia) actions. Like many movies of this kind, dialogues exist not as a tool to inform the audience, but as a natural representation of real life conversations.

There is a lot of things happened in 4 Months, but many of them are only being implied and never discussed outright.

[Spoiler]

One such scenes happens right before the abortion is performed. Mr. Bebe, who is already made disgruntled by the imperfect arrangement (despite Otilia's best efforts), eventually demanded Otilia and Gabriela to have sex with him as a form of payment for the service. And yet, no explicit words or scenes are shown; we merely see Bebe making a subtle demand, the quiet understanding on the girls' face, and then the girls taking turns visiting bathroom. In other more conventional movies, we would have seen angry arguments, tears, and perhaps even the sex scenes themselves; in 4 Months, it is entirely possible to even miss this crucial event by not paying enough attention. Such a bold and classy approach, even if I had to watch the sequence a few times to finally realize what had happened.


There are many political references in the film, made during Otilia's struggle to secure a safe location for the abortion and in a lengthy dinner scene between her and her boyfriend's family (she slipped out in-between the abortion to fulfill this appointment, but eventually has to come back to help out Gabriela some more). Those are meant to highlight oppressive government of Romania at that time (late 1980s), and while serve as an interesting backdrop, the most striking thing I find from the movie is on the relationship aspect between Otilia and Gabriela.

As we watch Otilia being an absolute great friend despite the many frustrating things that keep happening, questions naturally arise. Does she truly care for Gabriela, or she did all that merely due to a sense of duty as a friend? Does she wonder if Gabriela will do the same thing to her if their positions were reversed? What will happen to their friendship after the whole thing ends? Those questions are not answered, at least not explicitly, but the film had already done enough to give a great insight into a sample of female friendship dynamic.


4 Months is a great and very affecting movie, in spite (because?) of its anti-melodramatic tone. It takes a familiar conflict and looks at it from a different angle; not on the dilemma of having an unborn at the wrong time, but on the easier-said-than-done action of standing by your friend. A lot of people should be able to empathize with Otilia as she stands alone in the bathroom, looking at a glass mirror with a tired and hollow expression that may say, "Are all this...really worth it?"

Special Feature: Feminine Issues

"How important it is for us to recognize and celebrate our heroes and she-roes!" (Maya Angelou)

I don't have the exact figure, but I'm 100% certain that from all the movies that have ever been produced in the world, there would be much more male protagonists and characters than female ones. The narrative of a male hero saving a woman in trouble is one of the oldest ever conceived by human minds, and in 1985, author Alison Bechdel developed a set of parameters (later called 'Bechdel Test') to judge the strength of women's presence in movies; a vast majority of movies unsurprisingly failed the test. Worse, some movies are even downright misogynistic in how it openly mocks and undermines the importance of their female characters.

However, there is still a minority group of movies starring not only well-defined female characters, but also having them doing something other than just being the object of male characters' desire. Even as early as 1928, Renée Jeanne Falconetti gave a stunning performance as historical figure Jeanne D'Arc in The Passion of Joan D'Arc, widely regarded as one of the greatest silent movies ever; and who can forget the enigmatic wife character from Rashomon?

In the modern era of globalism, feminism, and other such -isms floating around, it is not surprising anymore to see the likes of Hollywood churning out movies featuring Sigourney Weaver (Alien series), Angelina Jolie (Tomb Raider, Wanted, Salt), Milla Jovovich (Resident Evil), and others as bad-ass female heroines. And yet, empowerment could be portrayed in a far deeper and more various ways than just giving huge guns to female characters and letting them kill bad guys with it.

Through the ages, the womankind had been experiencing issues and problems that a lot of males have no hope in fully comprehend, let alone empathize with. Hence, the focus of this particular feature, which assess movies that not only feature a female as its major character, but also explore distinctly feminine issues and themes from either biological, social, psychological, or political viewpoints. Pregnancy, maternal instinct, sexism, and dynamic in female relationship are among the themes prevalent in those movies, and to put them in spotlight is my tribute to the God's creatures that may occasionally confuse and aggravate me, but also ones I often adore and deeply respect.

Death in Cinema #5: Cherry Blossoms

"Assuming we don't have much time left...what do you want to do?"

Release Year: 2008

Country: Germany
Genre: Social drama
Director: Doris Dorrie
Screenwriter: Doris Dorrie
Cinematography: Hanno Lentz
Music: Claus Bantzer
Editing: Frank J. Muller, Inez Regnier
Actors: Elmar Wepper, Hannelore Elsner, Aya Irizuki

Letting go is one of the toughest and most complicated emotional process we can experience. Losing someone hurts, not only because we are unable to physically interact with them anymore, but also due to a bittersweet realization that every moments and memories spent in their company are now impossible to be experienced again. Sometimes we are unable to move on, stuck in the state of denial even though we always know that nothing in this world lasts forever. And of course, death is the ultimate evocation of that feeling, as shown in Cherry Blossoms.

The film focused on a relationship between old married couple, Trudi (Elsner) and Rudi (Wepper). Trudi had just been informed by Rudi's doctor that he is suffering from an incurable cancer, and so she sets out for them to have a long last trip (Rudi himself is unaware about his condition) and visit their children. However, the family reunion ends in an uncomfortable note as the couple gradually realize that they had grown too far apart from their children. Tragedy then struck as Trudi died on her sleep, leaving Rudi completely on his own. Spurred by his wife's unfulfilled desire to visit Mt Fuji and her fascination on Butoh dance, Rudi goes to Japan. There, he eventually forms a unique bond with teenage dancer Yu (Irizuki), who teaches him on how Butoh can be a medium to stay in touch with the dead soul of our loved ones.

Technically, Cherry Blossoms is a German film, but it has remarkably strong Japanese influence. The entire second half takes place in Japan, some of Japanese cultural aspects (particularly the Butoh dance and the titular cherry blossoms) are used as plot devices, and the movie itself can be considered as a homage to Yasujiro Ozu's classic masterpiece Tokyo Story. The whole family segment is practically lifted straight from that movie, making identical point on the strained relationship between grown-up children and their aging parents. However, Cherry Blossoms is not a simple remake, as it eventually morphs into an elegant and beautiful story of its own.



The story moves through several different emotional perspectives and relationships. First, we are shown the way Trudi's and Rudi's children considered them a nuisance, and how really detached they are from their parents despite all the smiles and courteous surface. This parent-child conflict is easily the weakest part in Cherry Blossoms, perhaps because it is a relatively inferior imitation of Ozu, but more likely because it feels too crude and theatrical (Rudi accidentally overheard his son complaining about him on the phone; the children whine and bitch about how bothersome it is to tend to their parents).


However, everything between Trudi and Rudi is pure gold. Wepper, and especially Elsner, succeed in radiating the level of affection and understanding that can only be achieved by two people who have been loving each other for a very long time. Initially we see things mostly through Trudi's eyes, getting ready to let go while trying her best to push the much less adventurous Rudi into having a nice last memory together. Then, after her shocking and ironic death, we are fully placed in Rudi's shoes; a lost and lonely man finding a new friend in Yu, a whimsical kid who is also completely alone in the world after her mother's death.

The Rudi-Yu relationship also works, despite the initially strange concept of an old man bonding with a pre-teen girl. The film wisely avoid taking their relationship into an inappropriate direction, and instead presents Yu and her Butoh dance as the embodiment of Trudi's passion that Rudi had never properly acknowledge during her lifetime.


Images are rich in this film, with highlights being the Mt Fuji spectacle, the cherry blossoms observation, and numerous demonstrations of Butoh dance moves and expressions. However, the most magnificent image comes near the end; of two particular characters dancing together on the edge of a lake near Mt Fuji. The dance itself, the context, and the piece of lilting music that accompanies it combine into an extremely affecting scene that carries extraordinary emotional impact. It is a fitting and beautiful climax to the movie.


Of the five films that I reviewed for Death In Cinema, Cherry Blossoms is my favorite, barely edging out After Life. It is true that there are missteps and some scenes that don't become as effective as Dorrie perhaps intended, but some great acting, sumptuous visual and evocative mood make this film a powerfully bittersweet experience.

Death in Cinema #4: After Life

"To know that you belong in someone else's precious memory...
that is the most wonderful feeling."

Release Year: 1998
Country: Japan
Genre: Social drama/fantasy drama
Director: Hirokazu Koreeda
Screenwriter: Hirokazu Koreeda
Cinematography: Yutaka Yamazaki
Music: Yasuhiro Kasamatsu
Editing: Hirokazu Koreeda
Actors: Arata, Erika Oda, Susumu Terajima, Takashi Naito, Kei Tani


Memories.

Those are what connected us to our past, projecting and highlighting the best and worst moments in our temporary life. There are happy memories we cherish about, painful memories that we wanted to forget but unable to, and random trivial memories that never seem important until they suddenly creep on us and bring unexpected emotion. They are all wonderfully subjective things, never be limited by mere facts, and enhanced by our perception and desire to interpret, re-interpret and re-construct them the way we wanted to.

Thus, After Life's conceptual question makes for a brilliant hook: if you have to select one memory from your entire life, what is it going to be? Which memory defines your life and that you prefer to remember above everything else?

After Life takes place in some sort of dormitory located 'in-between', a congregation site for dead people before they go on to 'Heaven'. There, a sort of administrative process is conducted: the recently deceased are informed by a team of 'counselors' that they have a week to pick one memory that they want to take with them to Heaven. Once they have made their choice, the officers will then reconstruct that memory, film-style, on the final day of their week-long stay.

Naturally, there are many questions that entail such a very interesting premise. What is exactly meant by the concept of Heaven in this film? What is the purpose of the whole procedure, and why the dead can only choose just a single memory? Where did those 'memory counselors' came from, and why are they chosen for the job? Why the concept of sin, punishment, and Hell are completely absent from the film? Some of those questions are answered, some are not; but then, Koreeda's primary intention is not to construct a multi-dimensional spiritual-fantasy world. The 'in-between administration office' is merely a tool, a medium used to raise questions and provoke thoughts about the process of recalling and cherishing memories at the end of one's existence.


(Mild spoiler)

We are shown the different ways the dead people (all of them seem at peace with the fact that they are dead) react to the news that they have to submit their most precious memory; some can do it right away, some change their minds after making an initial choice, and some other cannot make a choice at all. The story then focus on the counselors', particularly Takashi Mochizuki (Arata) and his quasi-love interest Shiori Satonaka (Oda), revealing that they used to be those people who cannot choose a memory to keep. They stayed in the place and help reconstructing other people's memories instead, and there is something really bittersweet within that whole notion.

Even with its nearly two-hour running time, After Life fleets by within its quiet and dream-like atmosphere, suggesting that there is still a lot left unsaid. The narrative approach is slightly scattershot, highlighting moments instead of the people in them, and there are times when I wish they would flesh out the characters more and give us more time to get to know them better. Yet, there is no denying that the movie is at its best during the montage-like scenes; the two best sequences are the one showing people recounting their chosen memory (some of them are actors working from a script, but others are actually non-actors talking about their real experiences), and another one when the counselors work together to assemble a film based on the deceased's memories--the metaphor on the latter is obvious.


Sometimes, you can see that a movie is clearly a personal and heartfelt project from the director, and it is indeed with the case with Koreeda, who was inspired to make After Life by his late grandfather's Alzheimer-induced memory loss. The concept, strongly rooted in a utopian vision, might be too ludicrous for some, but it works greatly as a gentle reflection on the inextricable link between memory, life, and death. Something that can make you think and feel at such a level is very special, indeed.

Death in Cinema #3: Gerry

"So we were going east all right, which is a total Gerry..."

Release Year: 2002
Country: United States
Genre: Psychological drama
Director: Gus Van Sant
Screenwriter: Casey Affleck, Matt Damon, Gus Van Sant
Cinematography: Harris Savides
Music: Arvo Part
Editing: Casey Affleck, Matt Damon, Gus Van Sant
Actors: Casey Affleck, Matt Damon

One of the most important accomplishments of renowned arthouse and indie director Gus Van Sant is 'The Death Trilogy". It consisted of three separate movies (Gerry, Elephant, and Last Days) that acted as reflections on existentialism and death, filmed in an unconventional manner that emphasized time and space much more than character and plotting. Of the three, Gerry is the most acclaimed; a story of two male friends being lost in a desert, low on dialogue and action but extremely thick on atmosphere and philosophical implications.

The term "Gerry" refers to the nicknames of both main characters (their real names are never revealed), and also used by them to refer to something dumb in general (apparently, it can be used as either noun, verb, or adjective, as in "Stop being a Gerry", "We keep Gerrying this", and "You're so Gerry"). There is a lot of these 'Gerry-situations' in the movie, starting from how the two friends being lost in a desert, without having any food or water on them. From there, it's a (very) slow romp through the vast landscape as their hope of making it out alive steadily fades away.

If the idea of watching two people stumble along slowly and occasionally mumbling to each other for almost the whole movie's duration sounds terribly dull to you, then stay far away. Van Sant constantly favored long camera shots throughout, with each shot averaged 10 minutes in length; the grand total of shots is 100, which is a remarkably low number for a feature film. Majority of them are tracking shots of the two characters walking (often bereft of sound except for the steady, crunching, noise of footsteps) or simply shots that locked in a certain part of the massive landscape. Again, if you cannot bear having to stare at the same thing (sky, canyon, two people walking) for 5-10 minutes, Gerry will probably bore you out of your mind.


However, once we're willing to adapt with the extremely slow pace and soak in the atmosphere, we shall be able to appreciate what Gerry has to offer. The cinematography is oftentimes beautiful, but more importantly, it reflects a Human vs. Nature conflict in its purest. There are no hungry predators or natural disaster, yet the overwhelming canyon, boundless sand, and scorching sun all combine into Nature's ruthless punishment for living mortals stupid Gerry enough to underestimate it.

(the above screenshot, by the way, represented what I consider as the movie's best scene; it is when Gerry [Affleck] somehow got himself rock-marooned while Gerry [Damon] look at him from far below. The far-away angle of the camera, the quiet exchange between the two, and the laborious length make the scene so much more effective than it supposed to be).


The acting and characterization are as minimalistic as they could ever be, yet so much can be inferred about the two characters. Affleck and Damon, who also co-wrote and co-edited the film, establish their characters' relationship and behavioral dynamic not through lengthy exposition or dramatic moments, but through sparse exchange of words and--more importantly--through the many periods of silence, either the comfortable kind or the tense kind of silence. The deceptively flat and unemotional acting conceal a complex set of emotions beneath the surface, which culminates in the shocking ending.


The plot of Gerry never really becomes more complicated or dramatic than the premise of "two friends got lost, walk in vain", and yet the underlying themes brim with the density; of male relationship, arrogance, hopelessness, faith, and death as the ultimate form of mercy. Above all, it is a quiet and elegant observation of two mortals flailing around something so overpowering, ageless, and oppressive.

Death in Cinema #2: Ponette

"God Almighty, you know my mommy is dead because she is with you.
I want to talk to my mommy."

Release Year: 1996
Country: France
Genre: Social drama
Director: Jacques Doillon
Screenwriter: Jacques Doillon
Cinematography: Caroline Champetier
Music: Philippe Sarde
Editing: Jacqueline Lecompte
Actors: Victoire Thivisol, Matiaz Bureau Caton, Delphine Schiltz


My first direct contact with death happened with my grandfather's sudden death when I was eight year-old. At the time, I already comprehended well what was going on and knew there is no chance that I will ever see or talk to my grandpa again. Yet, I wonder how I would have reacted if I was some years younger and have not properly understand the concept of death and afterlife yet. How would a mind of a very young child react to the death of their closest, and how should an adult educate them on the issue and help them cope?

Ponette is an attempt to answer those questions, presenting death as seen from the point of view of a four-year-old girl.

The mother of Ponette (Thivisol) died in a car crash, leaving the four-year-old and her father (Xavier Beauvois). Unable to raise his daughter while still dealing with his own grief, Ponette's father left her under the charge of her aunt, Claire (Claire Nebout); who has two kids of her own, Matiaz (Caton) and Delphine (Schiltz). During her stay there, the confused Ponette tries to find the answer of why her mother is not coming back and how she could see or talk to her again.

First thing's first, Thivisol's performance is extremely outstanding and probably the best child performance I have ever seen on a big screen. She plays her character with the amount of natural talent, spontaneity, and liveliness that surpassed so many older female actresses, and end up being the youngest ever actress to ever won a major acting award (a documentary called Joeuer Ponette was later made to highlight how Doillon and the crew guided the supremely talented girl throughout the movie's production). Thivisol is clearly a lot more intelligent than her age suggested, being able to convey the confusion, grief, and heart-breaking innocence every time the camera is trained on her.


In fact, the entire movie is built around its child performers. There are only two major adult characters, and one of them only appeared at the very beginning and very end of the movie. It makes for perhaps one of the most naturalistic and adorable casts in a movie, playfully bouncing off each other and displaying extreme ease in front of the camera. Oddly, there are scenes that seem out of place considering the age of the characters--Matiaz' extreme cuddling with Ponette, for instance, or the way the very young girls can already gossip about each other's crushes--I guess French kids just grow up really fast?

The most interesting aspect of the whole thing, however, is the way Ponette and the kids around her interpret death and the spiritual afterlife. The segment when Ponette, Matiaz, and Delphine discuss God and religion is a great example in showing how religion and fantasy collide in the impressionable and speculative minds of children. Amusing yet insightful, it implies that as imperfect as these kids' knowledge is, they also display the lack of cynicism and skepticism often found in adults. There is also the character of Ada (Léopoldine Serre), another small girl who tells Ponette that she must passes the test to be a "Child of God", so that she can convinces God into letting her talk to her dead mother. This make-believe story lead to some of the most touching moments in the movie; if you don't tear up even a bit when Ponette struggles to pass Ada's test, your heart is probably made of stone.


As alluded before, the adults' role is very small. The character of Ponette's father (who deserves a punch on the nose for leaving his kid like that) is hardly a role model for parents in similar situations, while even though Ponette's aunt did try to get through to her, the girl is much more inclined to listen to her friends instead. It seems that Doillon really wanted to focus strictly on childlike perspective, perception and imagination, which eventually leads into the rather controversial ending.

(SPOILER)

In the end, Ponette meets the ghost/apparition/dream of her mother, who tells her to be happy even though she is no longer there. This occurence is what finally enables Ponette to overcome her grief and let go. At first, this solution might feels like a "cheat" and a too convenient fix for Ponette's emotional turmoil. However, this narrative choice highlights the central theme of faith and spirituality in this movie: Ponette believes and prays hard, thus she is finally rewarded with the "chance" to meet her mother for the last time. Or you can also reason that it is a result of the internalized process inside her mind and a form of coping mechanism, yet one can't help but feel that the faith-based explanation is probably what the film-makers are aiming for.

The ending did bother me for a while, but I eventually appreciated it after thinking some more.


The movie (and the camera in particular) can feels pandering and manipulative at times by having Ponette cried in so many scenes and extensively closing up on her sad face, but it is not like there are many other ways to fully convey her grief effectively. Besides, that should not take anything away from either the very brave premise or Thivisol's performance. In short, this is a powerful tale of faith and mortality through the eyes of a very little girl and an implied reminder for adults of how malleable and fragile the minds of children are.

(Thivisol does not appear in many other movies after this one, her most prominent role being the Juliette Binoche's daughter in Oscar-nominated Chocolat. It seems that she is on hiatus from the movie industry, perhaps for academical reasons; but even if she does not take up acting again, those who watched her in Ponette shall never forget her magnificent display of talent there).