Arrival

SPOILER ALERT! The plot will be discussed.

Arrival (2016), directed by Denis Villeneuve, addresses the topic of communication between differing parties, how it can harm if misused or misunderstood, or heal if used properly. The film challenges the audience to see language as a way of viewing existence in a totally different way to which people are accustomed.

 Slow mournful music opens the film as Louise Banks (Amy Adams) narrates, “I used to think this was the beginning of your story. Memory is a strange thing. It doesn’t work the way I thought it did. We are so bound by time, by its order.” She looks at her infant daughter, Hannah. She seems to remember the girl’s life as she grew up. But her life was cut short by an illness. She then says, “But now I’m not so sure I believe in beginnings and endings. There are days that define your story beyond your life.” The opening appears to be a memory of something in the past. But it is not, as we learn. Time in this story is not linear. Her daughter’s name is Hannah, which is a palindrome. Its forward and backward spelling symbolizes a similar movement in time, as the story explores. (The title of the film could have many references. It could refer to the birth of a baby, arriving at a conclusion, as well as the landing of aliens).

The movie then shifts to when aliens arrive on Earth. Louise is an eminent linguistics professor. Her students interrupt her with news of the arrival of twelve spaceships on the planet, one in Montana. Later, Army Colonel Weber (Forest Whitaker) visits Louise and he points out that she helped the government in the past with translations and has a top-secret clearance. He asks her to attempt to translate the sounds made by two of the aliens’ voices recorded on a brief audio clip. She says since the language is a new one, she must interact with the visitors. Her response stresses the need for the coming together of different parties for communication to occur, which supports the main theme of the film. After he realizes Louise is the best choice for the job he agrees to take her to the landing site. 

On the helicopter flight she meets Ian Donnelly (Jeremy Renner), an experimental physicist, with whom she will be working. He quotes her when he says, “Language is the foundation of civilization. It is the glue that holds a people together. It is the first weapon drawn in a conflict.” The statement shows the dual nature of language, which can be used for friendly and hostile ends. (Many conflicts start with verbal accusations. However, we know that sometimes aggression towards another can just be the desire for a power-grab with no preceding argument). Ian disagrees with her, saying science is the “foundation.” From the start these two are from differing camps, and need to bridge the gap between them, just as the bigger story shows the requirement for nations to unite, and two species to come to a meeting of the minds.

 

The spacecraft is oval in shape and looks like a seashell. It stands on its vertical axis instead of sitting flat, which is what we would expect it to do. The position suggests that these aliens do not conform to our perception of what is routine. After arriving at the landing site, Louise and Ian wear protective gear, including an oxygen supply. These layers of apparel show how the start of a connection with others begins with a distancing step.

Weber says that every eighteen hours a door opens at the bottom tip of the spacecraft to allow visitors. Once they enter the opening, gravity changes and they can walk on the wall as if it was a floor. This phenomenon is another uncommon element which must be learned to make contact. (The soundtrack has siren that are similar to what The Purge films contain. Here, its use is ironic because it underlines how humans are apprehensive of the unknown, which can prevent the making of a connection with others).

The chamber in which Louise and Ian confront the aliens has a transparent barrier separating the two races. It is another actual and symbolic barrier to overcome. The aliens are very different than us. They are shrouded in a fog, again stressing the need to break through confusion towards some kind of clarity. Two approach the glass and each has seven tentacles, which leads to them being called “Heptapods” Louise feels overwhelmed at this first encounter, so she is not able to initiate any attempt at communication. Her response shows the difficulty dealing with those that differ so much from what we are accustomed to.

The people of Earth react with fear and apprehension as states of emergency are declared, looting occurs, travel is canceled, economies tank, and militaries prepare for fighting. The movie suggests that fear is a roadblock to understanding. One soldier on a phone call to home hears that his children are afraid “the monsters” are going to kill the father. The film here shows the narrow-minded fear of humans can block out understanding.

Louise tries written communication by using a pre-digital white-board to show a human alphabet. The Heptapods respond by secreting an ink-like substance (sort of what squid on Earth do) that illustrates their lettering. It is interesting that their graphics are circular, which points to how their minds work as we see later in the tale. Louise justifies using the written form of communication because it helps lessen misunderstanding. She makes up a story saying that when the natives of Australia were asked what the animals who hop around are called, they said, “kangaroo,” which Captain Cook decided to name the animals. But the word actually means, “I don’t understand.” Weber inserts the military attitude of being wary of anything foreign when he says that Louise should be careful what she teaches them so as not to give an advantage to possibly aggressive invaders. His response shows the defensive, fearful human attitude as opposed to the academic curious response.

Louise explains to Weber that asking, “what are your intentions?” is too complex a question to ask the newcomers up front. She must have them understand what a question is, and the difference between a personal “you” and the inclusive “you” that can include a whole people. So, she must have time to build a foundation of understanding. That patience from an impatient military standpoint is difficult to accept.

At the next session, the courageous Louise takes off her hazmat suit to break away from a distancing connection toward a personal one. She puts her open hand against the screen, and the alien does the same with its starfish-like end of its tentacle. They have exchanged a sort of “hello.” Now, when she writes her name on the white-board it shows it is easier to make the connection between the name and the person. Ian does the same, shedding his suit and writing his name on the board. The two Heptapods illustrate what appears to be their names. Ian calls them “Abbott and Costello.” For those who are too young to know, they made up a comedy team. But more significantly, their “Who’s on First” routine showed how confusing language can be.

As Louise immerses herself in the alien language she gets visions of her daughter. Again, we believe these are recollections. In these visions, we become aware that she and Hannah’s father have separated.

Ian narrates their findings at this point. He says unlike human languages that have sounds that correlate to the written forms, the alien language does not have that association. It “contains meaning. It doesn’t represent sound.” Ian thanks Pakistan for concluding that the aliens use a “logogram: which is free of time.” (The fact that another country has a breakthrough stresses the idea that cooperation between differing cultures can be a plus). Ian says that the extraterrestrial ship leaves no definite “footprint” since it has no traceable impact in terms of radiation, sound, or any other measurable form. The craft doesn’t even touch the ground. He says, “their written language has no forward or backward direction.” That sums up the circular images, which have variations on the circumferences of the circles to differentiate them. He adds, “Linguists call this nonlinear orthography, which raises the question, ‘is this how they think?’” They can see the beginning and end of a sentence simultaneously, and thus can write a complex sentence quickly. Here we have the idea of seeing time as nonlinear. (Why is Ian narrating here instead of Louise, the linguist? It could represent that Louise’s way of thinking is reaching another being whose background differs from hers, and thus meaning is being conveyed).

Ian and Louise sit out in the evening together, away from all the frenzy around them, where fear seems to rule social media platforms. He says how fortunate it is that he has her to work with, and she sees that all the work comes down to the two of them, which he sees as an attribute. They are not only bridging the gap between their two disciplines but also emphasizing the importance of a single interpersonal connection.

Ian has been reading about what Louise calls the “Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis” that says immersing yourself in a language “rewires your brain.” Louise says the theory states that “the language you speak determines how you think.” Louise, for the purposes of this story, is beginning to think like the aliens.

Weber and Louise are concerned because General Shang (Tzi Ma) of China makes an address that Louise concludes has references to mahjong. Louise sees the danger in trying to communicate by using game strategy because it uses language involving “opposition, victory, defeat.” She says, “If all I ever gave you was a hammer …” then, concludes Weber, “Everything’s a nail.” Here the film shows how a narrow view can block out the big picture and focus on negative interpretations.

Weber pushes Louise to ask what are the aliens’ purpose here. The response is “use weapon.” Louise, probably realizing the word “weapon” may have come from what the Chinese were communicating, stresses that the Heptapods may mean “tool.” The paranoid view of Agent Halpern (Michael Stuhlbarg) is the aliens, not seeing one ruler of the planet, wants the various nations “to fight among ourselves until only one faction prevails.” He says that world history shows that imperialistic nations have used this tactic in the past, implying it makes conquest simpler.

The nations had been cooperating but now are breaking off communications because of the leads of China and Russia becoming alarmed about the “use weapon” translation. They consider it a hostile attempt by the aliens to cause people to fight among themselves. Louise has the voice of sanity as she states the primary theme of this story: “We should be talking to each other!”

Now, using the information from prior sessions, Louise can use digital technology to transmit alien symbols to communicate quickly. Inside the spacecraft, the alien tells her to touch the transparent barrier and write on it directly to close the gap between them. Abbott and Costello transmit a complicated message. However, some scared military operatives planted explosives aboard the craft. As the explosion occurs, Abbott expels Louise and Ian from the meeting area to save them, showing the aliens’ nonviolent desires.

China issues an ultimatum to the aliens to leave within twenty-four hours or face destruction, and other countries line up behind General Shang. Meanwhile as Ian and Louise try to make sense out of the last communication, Louise has a dream of her daughter wanting a scientific word for a win-win scenario. She tells Hannah to ask her father. It is here that we may realize that the father is Ian.

Ian makes a breakthrough in his analysis of the alien message. He says the symbol for time appears all over the communication. Also, a 3-D illustration shows that the message sent by the Washington aliens occupies one twelfth of a larger message, shown by gaps in the image. Louise suggests that the full message is split between the twelve crafts and that the Heptapods want all the nations to collaborate in order to decipher a complete transmission. The aliens are encouraging unity, for all nations to take a leap to understand the whole picture, not just fractional perspectives. Ian says that they should make an effort to share what they have learned with other nations, implying the need to open the lines of communication and cooperation. But Halpern says that nobody is listening to anyone else, suggesting that the truth is not getting out. The film could be saying that is the problem with our world today.

The shell spacecraft now rises higher in the air, as if suggesting that it is up to the people of Earth to take charge. They do, however, send down a pod for Louise to access the ship. She enters a vaporous area behind the barrier from which an alien emerges. The full size of Costello appears, and it is taller than what Louise previously saw, with a type of head at the top. It is as if she is now gaining more knowledge coming out of a cloud of confusion. She is communicating verbally with them now and they understand each other. Costello says Abbots is dying, probably from the blast, a sacrifice made for humanity. He says they are helping Earth’s inhabitants because in three thousand years they will need our help. She asks how can they know the future, and then she sees a vision of Hannah again. When she asks who is the child, the audience now concludes that it is the future she now sees. She has been rewired and can think like the visitors. The “weapon” is really a tool, and it is language. (Of course, even though learning a new language may change how we order words and parts of speech, stress some aspects of life more than others, it doesn’t mean we actually are able to perceive existence to the level of, say, an Einstein, or have prescience. But, for the themes of this film, it works symbolically).

As the camp disbands, Louise hears her daughter say, “Wake up Mommy.” It’s as if she is telling Louise to realize what is happening. Louise has a premonition of meeting General Shang at a formal reception arranged by the President. Shang says that eighteen months ago she was able to change his mind, something nobody has done. He says that she contacted him on his “private number.” She says she doesn’t know it. He shows her his cell phone and says, “Now you know.” She takes this future information and uses it to contact Shang in the present on Halpern’s phone. He tells her the final words of Shang’s dying wife which only he could know, and she says them in Mandarin in the present. That act showed Shang that what she learned was a gift from the aliens and led him to give up aggression and seek unification with other countries. We get a view of a book she will publish called The Universal Language. It most likely will teach the people of Earth to learn the language of the aliens, and, maybe, think like them, thus allowing for that help for the aliens in the future.

In the present, their job done, the aliens leave. Ian admits that despite what he was looking for in the stars, he found meeting Louise is the most important discovery in his life. The stress here is on individuals. She holds him and we have a shot of them embracing in the future, as time collapses. She says in the present how she forgot how good it feels hugging him. Of course, the irony is this time is the first.

She asks him in that moment, if he knew his life from beginning to end, would he change anything. That is the final question this film asks us. She changed history by deciding to call Shang to tell him what she learned. But what about knowing that her daughter will die of a rare, incurable illness? Louise gives her answer when she says, in narration, “So, Hannah... This is where your story begins. The day they departed. Despite knowing the journey... and where it leads... I embrace it. And I welcome every moment of it.” She decides to go ahead with marrying Ian and having her daughter, even though she knows Ian will leave her for not telling her about this tragic moment in their future. He believed she made the wrong choice. The film asks us, what would we do?

The Lion in Winter

 SPOILER ALERT! The plot will be discussed.

I enjoy good dialogue and there is plenty of it in The Lion in Winter (1968). James Goldman wrote the screenplay based on his play (and won a writing Oscar). The writing reveals the characters’ personalities while it entertains with its wit and ferociousness. In a way the movie is a medieval version of Who’s Afraid of Virginia Wolfe. The main desire here is ambition and power, and the hope of the royal offspring for acknowledgment. But also for the king and his wife it’s a game to keep them engaged in life in defiance of aging.

The titles are displayed with stone carvings of historical visages which suggest the iconic nature of these bigger-than-life people. Peter O’Toole reprises his role of King Henry II of England, an older version of the ruler he played in Becket which depicted the royal’s relationship with Richard Burton’s archbishop. He was nominated for an Oscar for Best Actor in both films, although I consider this performance the best in a distinguished career. The opening scene has Henry still strong enough to swordfight in his “winter” years as he says, “Come for me!” He is testing one of his sons, John (Nigel Terry), to see if he is worthy of the crown.

Henry wants his kingdom, and therefore his legacy, to last. He tells Alais (Jane Merrow), his young lover, that he doesn’t want to go the way of King Lear who divided his lands between three children and weakened the kingdom. In the twelfth century, the people thought the King was the closest individual to God. Thus, who held the position was of extreme importance. Unfortunately, in this story, the candidates are seriously flawed.

Henry flatters for the moment whoever he wants to win over and disdains those he wishes to lord over. He wants to reassure Alais by saying he has bedded many, including “countesses,” “whores,” “and little boys,” but he only loves her. He dismisses his queen, Eleanor of Aquitaine (Katharine Hepburn, tying with Barbra Streisand for the Best Actress Oscar for that year), calling her “the gorgon,” who is “decaying” where he “dungeons” her and only releases Eleanor on holidays. She is a threat to his wishes, but as we see a threat he respects.

We meet Richard, who we know as “the Lion-Hearted,” in the form of Anthony Hopkins (in his feature film debut). This son, too, is introduced in combat games as he jousts. He knocks a foe off his horse and appears to be ready to kill him with his sword until interrupted. Richard’s face appears in turmoil, as he struggles with his bloodlust.

The film introduces son Geoffrey (Johns Castle) also engaging in battle, but not personally. He does not physically partake in combat, but he instead directs troops in war games. The scene shows Geoffrey to be intellectual, aloof, seeing others do the fighting for him.

Alais reassures Henry after a bout of lovemaking that he will endure the day’s obstacles because he is like the rocks at Stonehenge, and that “nothing knocks” him down. The reference recalls the stone figures displayed with the credits, suggesting the king’s almost mythical strength.

Eleanor wants Richard to be king, and Henry wants John. But their only motives may be that they want to fight each other as opposed to believing their selections are the best ones. John is an adolescent who according to Alais has pimples and smells. He runs around like a child at play or in fear. Henry is willing to have Alais marry John for her dowry while she will remain his mistress. It seems the powerful are exempt from rules of morality. Along with the children, Alais wants some recognition, saying she could be a threat to Henry if she discloses what he wants. He dismisses her importance after previously saying how she is the only thing he ever loved. He brandishes his power, telling her that whatever he says, goes, and that includes him saying they are through or that she is to marry John.

Henry says to Alais that there may have been an “era” when he adored Eleanor. The word evokes a person whose life is attached to the ages. In contrast to that sense of grandeur, Henry moves one hair on her ahead that is askew, saying “nothing in life has any business being perfect.” There is a cynical feel to Henry sometimes, as if life is not what it’s cracked up to be.

John talks like a child, saying daddy loves me best, while Richard declares that he will be the next sovereign. Henry says to Alais he has no problem with his boys plotting against him, because it’s politics, which is a skill necessary to lead. He says, “I’ve plotted all my life. There’s no other way to be alive, king, and fifty all at once.” There is that harsh reality that Henry acknowledges about the world of rulers.

When Eleanor arrives by boat, the first thing Henry asks is whether the water parted for her. She said she told it to stay flat. They revel in the majestic nature of their positions. They smile at each other as they banter, with her sarcastically saying how he keeps her young because he lets her out for the Christmas holidays, like a schoolgirl. She is frank in her language and blunt when she tells her sons that despite her superior position, her destiny as a woman came down to what gender babies she produced. If she had not produced only girls with her first husband, she would still be queen of France and never would have met these sons. “Such, my angels, is the role of sex in history,” she says.

Eleanor says she raised Alais so she has mixed feelings about her. Richard calls her the “whore,” and yet he wants her as his queen as does John. Politics and power reign, not love. Henry jokingly says he and Eleanor will fight “tusk to tusk for eternity.” He relishes the family fight, and there is the feeling that they believe they are beyond earthly constraints and will live forever.

King Philip (Timothy Dalton) is a young monarch, and Henry attempts to bully him about treaties, but the French leader holds his own in their initial meeting. Alais is Philip’s half-sister and the daughter of the previous king of France, Eleanor’s first husband, Louis. He had promised Alais to Henry’s heir to the throne. Philip wants that to happen so that France will have influence in England. Otherwise, Philip wants the area known as Vexin, which was Alais’s dowery, forfeited. Henry says he already occupies the land, so he owns it. But as he reveals to Eleanor later he does not want another war, and enjoys the actions of a peaceful king.

Richard has possession of the precious Aquitaine region and refuses to yield anything to John who he calls “that walking pustule.” John appears hunched over and decrepit, so Richard’s assessment of him is understandable.

Geoffrey says he will be John’s chancellor, which is a powerful position. He positions himself for that job because Geoffrey says, “no one thinks of the crown and thinks of Geoff.” He adds, “It’s not the power I feel deprived of; it’s the mention I miss. There’s no affection for me here; you wouldn’t think I’d want that, would you?” Geoffrey knows his place in his parents’ feelings, but he resents that he is not accepted by them. Thus, he must be content with being the power behind a week person sitting on the throne. So, John is his best choice to be king.

Eleanor says to Alais she prefers her to her boys, but it is just a setup to then remind her that Henry chose Alais and her land over his previous lover. The implication is that he will have no problem discarding her for his own purposes. She then says she wouldn’t hurt Alais, after she just did, and Alais understands how unscrupulous Eleanor is.

Henry and Eleanor rotate words of affection and attacks with whiplash speed. He asks how she is doing but then says he will never set her free since she led several civil wars against him. He also dismisses Alais as just an old man’s dalliance, while before he told the young woman he loved her. She says she does like seeing him again. Their respect for each other comes through here, as she says he is still “a marvel of a man,” and he says, “and you’re my lady.”

On the surface they go to dinner smiling, hand-in-hand, as they walk among the many guests. Eleanor says she will have Richard become king and cares about that because Henry cares who will succeed him. She readily admits it is just to vex him that she disagrees. He says he wants some peace, and she offers, “eternal peace,” a not-so-subtle death threat. When he says he will strike her any way he can there are dogs barking and growling in the background to stress the savagery behind his threat, and she looks worried. She asks if he ever loved her and he says no, another reversal of affections. She says it will make their fighting easier, but her asking implies that she feels hurt.

Eleanor asks Richard to see her. She says she hopes for a reunion since they have been apart. But she calls him “dull,” and when she states that his violence on the battlefield agrees with him, it is not a compliment. He doesn’t trust her, thinking he she might try to ambush him. He has the Aquitaine, but believes she wants it back. He says she’s “so deceitful,” that she “can’t ask for water” when she’s “thirsty.” She would lie even if her life was at stake. He goes on to say, “We can tangle spiders in the webs you weave.” Now that is a witty way of saying his mother can trap even those that are skillful in laying their own traps.

Henry says he is willing to give in to letting Richard be king because his son would fight him for it anyway, and at least England would stay unified. John, of course, feels betrayed.

Eleanor is always suspicious of her husband and says that the “second coming” will occur before Henry gives up on John and lets Richard marry Alais. Geoffrey has no loyalty to anyone but himself, so he quickly says he will help Eleanor if he becomes Richard’s chancellor by manipulating John. She sees his cruel selfish nature, and he acknowledges that he would sell them all out if he found a way. Geoffrey shows that Henry is right when he said that “power” is the only fact to face in the world as it is the preoccupation of all heads of state, then and now.

In another talk with Richard, Eleanor says she just wants to see him be king, but he says that all she wants is to get vengeance on Henry for locking her up, and he does not want to be used for that purpose. She goads him by saying how Henry was superior to Richard at an earlier age. She recalls when Henry was eighteen he had, “a mind like Aristotle’s and a form like mortal sin. We shattered the Commandments on the spot.”  This daunting description again shows how the two envision themselves as grander than others. It also emphasizes Eleanor’s earthiness, which is noted when she says she rode “bare-breasted” while on one of the Crusades. After being pushed, she admits that what she really wants is the Aquitaine back, and Richard believes it because it is power she wants. She says she wants it only because she can use it to bargain with Henry. When she says she loves Richard, he is cold, saying, “You love nothing. You’re incomplete. The human parts of you are missing. You’re as dead as you are deadly.” His zombie-like description of her has truth in it, but we have seen varying emotions in her. She cuts herself on the arm and he melts, as she reminds him of pleasant memories when he was a child. Is she sincere about her affections? Maybe, at least in the moment.

                                    

The following scenes are labyrinthine in the moves and counter moves, as all the principles jockey for position. It’s not an accident that there is a chessboard with pieces on display. Philip, Geoffrey, and John plot a war against Richard and Eleanor to make John king. Eleanor tells Henry that perhaps Richard would not believe Henry’s offer to make him king. His witty response is, “There’s no sense in asking if the air is good if there’s nothing else to breathe.” Henry’s impression of his absolute power is evident here. He wants the Aquitaine for John, and she refuses. She says she’s like the earth, “There’s no way around me.” She refuses to bow under Henry’s threats. She knows she can still inflict emotional pain on him when she says she slept with Thomas Becket. When he shudders, she admits it’s a lie, but she can see she can hurt him. She even suggests that she may have slept with Henry’s father. He offers her freedom after ten years of imprisonment if she releases the Aquitaine to John. She counters with only if Richard and Alais marry immediately. Again, there are dogs barking and growling to mimic the bestial nature of these attacks on each other.

Henry acts as if he goes along with the marriage despite Alais’s protests. She has already expressed her disgust at being used as a pawn and doubts Henry’s stating he loves her. When they are at the altar, Henry lets out that he will get the Aquitaine so that Richard will hear it and refuse to go forward with the wedding. Philip may be young, but he realized Henry’s ploy to torpedo the wedding. John is back in the picture again as a possible king. And the scheming goes round and round.

Henry says he enjoys being king as he plays with the ambitions and emotions of others. It is sadistic. Eleanor takes on the role of masochist as she asks to see Henry kiss Alais. She says it’s an intellectual exercise because she imagines it and wants to see how reality fits her imagination. However, when she witnesses the act, she shakes, and her eyes become moist. Her sense of loss is palpable.

She feels defeated and resigned to going back to her jail. Her sons visit her. Cold Geoffrey is probably that way because, as he says, he only remembers indifference from his parents. Eleanor admits that at times they did not like any of the children, which explains the young men’s insecurity. There is sibling rivalry between John and Richard to the point that Richard draws a knife. Eleanor says they all have knives. Despite the current times (1183), “we’re barbarians … We are the killers. We breed wars. We carry it like syphilis inside ... For the love of God, can’t we love one another, just a little. That’s how peace begins … We could change the world.” Her words are timeless, as she lays all crimes of violence at the feet of leaders who rule countries and members of families who feud with each other.

John blurts out that he must see Philip because they had an alliance to wage war against Henry and Richard and he must stop Henry from hearing about it to stay in the king’s favor. Eleanor, feeling revived as she sees an opening to get what she wants, tells Richard to promise Philip “anything.” Her insinuation reveals that she probably knows of Richard’s homosexual involvement with Philip in the past.

An almost absurd scene follows in Philip’s chambers as all the males maneuver for political position. John, hiding, hears Geoffrey plot against everyone else with Philip. John’s dullness can be seen as he says to Geoffrey, “You’re a stinker, and you stink.” Whereas the more eloquent insult from Geoffrey is, “If you’re a prince, there’s a hope for every ape in Africa.” Richard arrives as the other two brothers hide. Richard wants Philip’s military backing to gain the throne. The conversation reveals what Eleanor hinted at, and the affection that Richard has for Philip under his bluster is evident. As Philip said, tapestries are for hiding, so Richard now hides as Henry shows up. Henry discovers Philip’s plans of pitting Henry’s children against him. Philip tells Henry about suffering Richard’s advances and allowing Richard to believe he loved him so he could lord it over Henry. The sons come out of hiding, and Richard is embarrassed and emotional for a change as he said he would have been loyal to Henry if his father had shown some affection for him. John’s willingness to wage war against Henry hurts the monarch, but John says Henry never loved anybody. Geoffrey says he’s all that’s left to choose from to be king, but he is loyal only to his own ambitions. Henry and Eleanor’s desire to control and adopt power plays left their sons warped in emotional deprivation.

Henry is shaken by the nature of his boys and denies them all. He says he married a woman “out of legend,” still showing his admiration for Eleanor. But he says he had no “sons,” and says his children are gone.

A meeting between Eleanor and Alais contrasts them and yet shows their mixed feelings for each other. Eleanor says she may have loved Henry “before the flood,” referencing Genesis, adding to her perception of a connection to ancient and biblical times. She doesn’t like that Alais would sit next to Henry because that is her place. Alais says that Eleanor loves the kingdom whereas she just loves Henry. She says her gift for Christmas would be for Eleanor to suffer. But then they embrace, since Eleanor and she were close for many years.

Henry enters and dismisses Alais. Eleanor is tired and says she just wants things over. She says she will sign her lands over to John, but Henry just applauds her, assuming it’s a performance. They have been so devious with each other they can’t even tell what’s true, He says that he doesn’t want her to sign anything. He delights in manipulating her and finally reveals that he will go to Rome for an annulment so he can marry Alais and she can give him more sons, the current ones being defective. He says Geoffrey is “a device. He’s wheels and gears.” John cheats, lies, frequents whores, and whips servants. She blames him for John, and he blames her for keeping Richard to herself and denying him complete development. They continue to spar as she says, “I adored you. I still do.” He says that’s the most terrible lie of all. She says she knows, “That’s why I saved it up until now.”

They momentarily relish the dynamic between them, hug, reminisce, and kiss. However, they can’t help themselves; they must keep battling. She says there will be no annulment because she will not let Henry go. He says there is no connection between them, no meetings, gifts, or communications. What she really wants still is Richard to become king, and she just has to wait as he grows old and feeble for it to happen. If a son is born to him, she’ll push Richard through “the nursery door,” to kill his “grotesque” offspring. She does not consider that scenario cruel after all that he has put her through. She says, “I could peel you like a pear and God himself would call it justice!”

As Henry is ready to storm off to Rome for an annulment from the Pope, Eleanor says that his sons will join with her and Philip to defeat him when the boys know his plan to marry and have more sons. He counters by saying he will lock them all up. She torments him by describing having had sex with his father. After he runs out, she says, in contrast to the previous exalted dialogue, “Well, what family doesn’t have its ups and downs.” It’s an ironic statement considering how we have been dealing with kings, princes, and a queen. Hardly a pedestrian bunch.

Henry imprisons the boys and convenes an entourage to take him and Alais to Rome for an annulment and a wedding. She wisely notes that he must keep the sons imprisoned or else they will revolt. And if Henry dies and they get out they will kill the new offspring. Eleanor bribes a knight so she can give the captives knives to escape. Geoffrey thinks the best move is to kill Henry, which horrifies Eleanor. She tells Richard it’s “unnatural” to be an assassin. He counters with the nihilistic view that exists in the story by saying, “If poisoned mushrooms grow and babies come with crooked backs, if goiters thrive and dogs go mad and wives kill husbands, what’s unnatural?” She says she is not responsible for what he has become, but he points out she was his role model.

Henry shows up in the wine cellar and when Richard grabs one of the knives, Henry tosses the other knives to John and Geoffrey. Henry now echoes what were the first lines of the film, “Come for me!” It is not just practice now, but it can be a test. Geoffrey doesn’t have the stomach for it. Richard has difficulty initiating the attack against the reigning king. John lunges for Henry, who sidesteps him and puts a knife to his throat. Eleanor surprises by calling Henry’s bluff. She says they are assassins and traitors so he should execute them. Henry slams the flat part of his sword onto Richard’s shoulder and finds that he cannot kill his own children.

He says he’s lost everything and blames Eleanor. She is unsympathetic to his complaints. She tells him to take responsibility. “If you break it’s because you are brittle,” she says. She has truly lost, she says, because she can’t have him back. She says she wants to die, and he comforts her. She says there is no hope in life, but he counters by saying they are alive and that is what hope is, a kind of reduction of the cliché, “Where there’s life, there’s hope.” She says that they are “Jungle creatures.” Despite their intelligence, they figuratively claw and bite to survive.

He accompanies her to her boat, and she asks if she can come back at Easter. He says, “Come the resurrection, you can strike me down again.” They look forward to their political and personal jousts. He says as she sails away that he hopes they never die, and she feels the same. He says, “Do you think there’s any chance of it?” The two historical battlers laugh as they part, contemplating immortality again. And right they are, since they live on in texts and stories.

All Quiet on the Western Front

SPOILER ALERT! The plot will be discussed. 

All Quiet on the Western Front (1930) on the Oscar for Best Motion Picture. It remains one of the best dramatic depictions of the horror of war. The opening note states the film is trying “to tell of a generation of men, even though they may have escaped its shells, were destroyed by the war.”

The film begins in Germany. It is interesting that the perspective is from the enemy of the allies. It creates understanding that war is horrible to the youth of any country. Here, there is a feeling of patriotism as soldiers march through the streets with cheers from the populace. Professor Kantorek (Arnold Lucy) exhorts his students to be patriotic and wishes that they would enlist to fight for “the fatherland.” That paternal influence carries over as a student imagines coming home in a military uniform. The mother is frightened for her child, while the father smiles with pride. Thus, there is an immediate indictment of men as supporters of warfare. The voiceover from the professor says, “Are your mothers so weak that they cannot send a son to defend the land which gave them birth?” That statement is false, since it is the mother who gave birth, not the country. The film satirically shows the feeling at the time that weakness, not love and compassion, seem to define motherhood.

Other students picture being adored by women and received as heroes. Kantorek, abusing his position to manipulate innocent youths, goes on to say that he believes the war will be quick with not that many casualties. Boy, was he wrong about WWI. As to those that do fall in battle, he translates a Latin phrase that says, “Sweet and fitting it is to die for the fatherland.” The film suggests that kind of patriotism is just a rationalization to have young men sacrifice themselves. Although acknowledging that one young man there has the talent to become a great writer, Paul Baumer (Lew Ayres), the professor says that personal ambitions must be sacrificed for the country. And using that propaganda a country seduces many youths into sacrificing themselves for what in the end was no good reason. However, one student, Behn (Walter Rogers) cries, probably realizing the horror of confronting death in war.

The others see Paul as a leader and when he succumbs to the patriotic call, the others ride the wave of peer pressure, saying they will enlist. That pressure even convinces the reluctant Behn to join them. The empty classroom after they leave feels like a graveyard for lost possibilities.

In the barracks the young men are pumped up with adrenalin as they think about participating in battles to come, like school children wanting to play make-believe games. Himmelstoss (John Wray), who used to be the town postman, is now their commander, since he was in the reserves. He bullies the group as he puts them through degrading training. The story shows how power can warp the ego and convince a person that one’s self-importance overshadows all others. He says, “I’ll make soldiers out of you, or I’ll kill you!” The crawling through the mud during their exercises symbolizes how uncivilized one becomes to engage in the savagery of war. Even though the film was released in 1930, Himmelstoss’s regimentation and breaking down individuality are what we see in many films about boot camp (for example, Full Metal Jacket and An Officer and a Gentleman).

Ideas of war being glorious turn to feelings of horror. Bombs go off killing soldiers as Behn feels paralyzed next to the body of one of their fallen comrades. There is chaos as everyone scatters. The older, cynical soldiers laugh when Paul asks about getting some food, since they know it’s in short supply. They must pay for their food with supplies to eat portions of a pig that the forager, Kat Katczinsky (Louis Wolheim), stole from a field station. The film depicts a desperate situation where they must steal from each other to get by. Kat tells the new recruits he wonders what can make them want to enlist, but he is talking from experience.

On an assignment with Kat to set up barbed wire fencing, one of the new soldiers complains about the driving of the truck. Kat says if the soldier breaks his arm in an accident, he gets to go home which is better that getting a “hole in your gut.” Whistling bombs fall and the men duck in fear. The immersion in the reality of combat quashes their religious zeal for fighting.

As bombs fall, Behn sustains injuries. One soldier risks his life to get him to the trenches, but Behn dies. Kat says don’t risk your life for a lost cause, which is basically what war is for its victims. The constant bombing keeps them up at night. When one does sleep, he has a nightmare about the loss of Behn. A couple get hysterical as bombs get closer and Kat knocks them out so they don’t rush from their bunker. Franz Kemmerick (Ben Alexander) later does run outside and is wounded in the stomach. The men are experiencing post-traumatic stress disorder, which was called “shell shock” back then.

If glory hasn’t already been dispensed with, the bullet holes in a bucket carrying one loaf of bread to feed many and the infestation of rats help dispel ideas of glorious heroism. (Does the one load allude to the need for a miracle to feed a multitude?). The soldiers finally get the call to fight. What they witness is horrific. Bombs and gunfire wipe out soldiers. All that’s left of one soldier are his hands grasping barbed wire. Hand-to-hand combat depicts soldiers using bayonets on each other. Camera angles are from the ground to involve the audience in the horror. For 1930, this film is particularly gruesome showing the devastation of war.

When they get back behind the battle lines a soldier wipes blood off a loaf of bread. Even basic sustenance is contaminated by death. At their camp, because the cook prepared food for twice as many soldiers, but only half survived, there is irony in the fact that they get extra rations, darkly benefitting due to the death of their comrades.

The camera focuses on individual soldiers as they suffer and when they eat, showing them as unique people, not just an indistinct mass of weaponry. As they finish their meal, the men, who have had their fill of dead bodies and now food, finally question the whole existence of war. One says that the people of one country become offended by another. Tjaden (Slim Summerville) says he shouldn’t be there since he is not offended. He says if the Kaiser is back home, why shouldn’t he be? Another says he never met Englishmen before and yet he now is supposed to shoot them. He reasons that many have never met a German. The stress here is that those fighting the war most of the time don’t have any personal reasons for being there, and they were never asked their wishes. One soldier says the orders come from those rulers who want to be “famous. Why, that’s history.” One says, “manufacturers get rich.” Amother soldier sums up the driving force behind those that initiate war, which is selfishness. Kat says that the leaders should be the ones fighting each other, which implies that then there wouldn’t be the loss of so many lives that way.

While the comrades visit Franz, he experiences phantom pain in his foot, and realizes that doctors have amputated it. Mueller (Russell Gleason) asks if he can have Franz’s boots until he realizes how selfish (the force behind war) he is being. After the others leave, Paul tries to comfort the nineteen-year-old after the desensitized doctor says there is nothing to be done. Paul returns to the camp and says that he watched Franz die. His understandable defense mechanism was to run away and seek mental comfort thinking about being in open fields and wanting to be with girls.

Paul has Franz’s boots and Mueller puts them on. He says he doesn’t mind the war with such comfortable footwear. The camera focuses on the boots as Mueller marches with a smile on his face. That look is gone as he sustains wounds. There is no escape from the pain that war brings.

The soldiers have learned the hard way about what they have lost and now yearn for the lives they gave up, such as work, families, and the company of women. Himmelstoss shows up and his former recruits mock him now as self-importance has no place in the trenches. He is in the same boat as the rest of them now and he suffers the same fate on the front lines, getting killed by enemy fire, appropriately in a cemetery.

Paul gets attacked in a foxhole by a French soldier whom he stabs. They are in the ditch together all night, and that closeness to another human casualty makes the war intimate for Paul. He now tries to help the victim he was forced to harm. He says that if they didn’t have to wear the opposing uniforms they could be brothers. After the man dies, Paul seeks forgiveness for what he now considers not justified violence but a crime he was forced to commit.

There is some comic relief for these men (and for the audience) as they bring food and drink for local young women so they can spend time with them. Kat gets drunk, as he distracts an inebriated Tjaden so that Paul and his two fellow soldiers can have the three women to themselves. The film is pretty raunchy for its time as the men earlier bathed in the canal and their naked behinds can be seen. Later, there is a conversation offstage between Paul and the girl Suzanne who are obviously in bed together. Even though he will never see her again, she has helped him shed the horrors of war for the moment, a moment he says he will never forget, which unhappily will not be for long.

Back to harsh reality, Paul is wounded and the cruel facts of the hospital become evident. They move those who are dying or dead quickly to a room next to the morgue for convenience purposes. By doing so they open up a bed for the next victim. They must amputate the leg of Paul’s friend, Alfred Kropp (William Bakewell), and his phantom pain is an echo of what happened to Franz, which points to the awful repetition of war. Paul is discharged but as Alfred remains, he blots out the heads of himself and Paul in a picture, showing how the war has ended his life as he knew it.

As Paul walks in his hometown on furlough, there are images of heartbreak as we see one soldier using crutches to deal with an amputation and there is a boy with what might be his dead father’s uniform and weapons. Paul’s mother is ill which adds to the sadness of the homecoming. A butterfly collection in his home is just a memory that shows how peaceful life used to be. The movie is an early depiction (as we later see in many films, such as Coming Home, and The Hurt Locker) of how a returning soldier is alienated by the average lives of others who do not understand the impact of combat on soldiers. One man at the pub acts like the sacrifice of soldiers is needed and that the food is worse back home, saying there is only the best for the soldiers. He tells this misinformation to Paul who has suffered hunger on the front lines. Men at the pub pull out a map and tell Paul what must be done to claim victory. It is easy for them to plot strategy in the absence of what it is really like in the trenches.

Paul returns to Kantorek’s classroom where the professor still is exhorting youths to believe in the heroic mythology about how grand and patriotic it is to sign up to be soldiers. A reluctant Paul tells them the simple truth: “We live in the trenches out there. We fight. We try not to be killed, but sometimes we are. That’s all.” When the professor tells him not to dwell on the negative, Paul angrily says, “When it comes to dying for your country, it’s better not to die at all.” He says there are millions who die in war “and what good is it?” The point being made is that the cost of war renders nobody a winner. The students don’t want to listen to someone upsetting what they have heard and want to believe. They yell out “coward!” in their naïve ignorance. Paul says he wants to cut his leave short because the pain of seeing how warped are the views of the civilians is more disturbing than being at the front. At least there he knows where he stands, as do the other soldiers.

When Paul returns, he sees more youth there to replace those dying as the circle of death continues. He sees Kat and they speak the truth about how hopeless the war is. When a bomb goes off near them Kat says he broke his shin, but his wounds are worse than he lets on. Paul carries him back to the camp and finds out that Kat died. Kat said he would be the last to go, so his passing is an omen as to the state of the conflict. Paul said Kat was all he had left, so he is now empty of connection to anything.

In a trench, Paul sees a beautiful butterfly. He reaches for it, as if trying to capture some innocence and beauty that was in his childhood. However, death is on the battlefield and an enemy soldier shoots and kills Paul. His outstretched hand, which was seeking an escape. is stopped in the act. The last shot of the film is devastating as young soldiers march off to war with a cemetery and a sea of crosses appearing in the background as if to say that they are heading to their deaths. The thrust here is that it is only quiet on the western front for those in the graveyard.