Mammoth (2009)
The symbolism of the title will escape most people (it did me), but it literally shows up in an expensive pen with mammoth tusk inlays. This pen crosses a border of wealth and culture that the characters of the movie can't ever cross. And yet the lives of all the many different narratives interwoven here are perfectly parallel.
But we know that parallel lines by definition never meet, even if they seem to in the distance down the tracks.
The three or four narrative threads are relatively independent even if they relate completely in theme (and in some small direct connecting way) to each other. It's a little like "Babel" in that the stories are literally worlds apart. Central is the New York City couple with the two main stars, computer games analyst (Gael Garcia Bernal) and his emergency room surgeon wife (Michelle Williams). They have a child who is mostly taken care of by a live-in nanny, a Filipino woman with children of her own left behind in her home country.
The third locale is Thailand because Bernal goes there on a business trip, and while he's there he has a kind of epiphany about the meaning of life. That's where the pen takes on a brief life of its own. The epiphany, like many revelations for all of us, is short-lived, too, and I think that's part of the idea. We all strive, we all have good intentions, but really nothing quite adds up.
What figures most in all of the stories are the children--not least the cute and precocious New York City girl. The children of the nanny and the child of a Thai prostitute who has a slightly caricatured but important role also figure in. If the parents are doing what they can for their children, they are also even more doing what they can for themselves. And sometimes it seems like survival, but of course, survival how, at what economic level? Would it be better in fact to not prostitute yourself (as a nanny, for example) simply to get ahead? Or is this the only way to give your children something you don't get for yourselves.
All of this is in the movie. It's intense, it wants to say a lot. And in some way it does. There is some sense that it doesn't always quite click, as if there are things the director could have pushed--or pulled--for greater effect. This isn't something to really judge from the outside, but it's not a masterpiece, which requires some other kind of aesthetic elevation. But it's really good, very good, a movie to see. See it.
The symbolism of the title will escape most people (it did me), but it literally shows up in an expensive pen with mammoth tusk inlays. This pen crosses a border of wealth and culture that the characters of the movie can't ever cross. And yet the lives of all the many different narratives interwoven here are perfectly parallel.
But we know that parallel lines by definition never meet, even if they seem to in the distance down the tracks.
The three or four narrative threads are relatively independent even if they relate completely in theme (and in some small direct connecting way) to each other. It's a little like "Babel" in that the stories are literally worlds apart. Central is the New York City couple with the two main stars, computer games analyst (Gael Garcia Bernal) and his emergency room surgeon wife (Michelle Williams). They have a child who is mostly taken care of by a live-in nanny, a Filipino woman with children of her own left behind in her home country.
The third locale is Thailand because Bernal goes there on a business trip, and while he's there he has a kind of epiphany about the meaning of life. That's where the pen takes on a brief life of its own. The epiphany, like many revelations for all of us, is short-lived, too, and I think that's part of the idea. We all strive, we all have good intentions, but really nothing quite adds up.
What figures most in all of the stories are the children--not least the cute and precocious New York City girl. The children of the nanny and the child of a Thai prostitute who has a slightly caricatured but important role also figure in. If the parents are doing what they can for their children, they are also even more doing what they can for themselves. And sometimes it seems like survival, but of course, survival how, at what economic level? Would it be better in fact to not prostitute yourself (as a nanny, for example) simply to get ahead? Or is this the only way to give your children something you don't get for yourselves.
All of this is in the movie. It's intense, it wants to say a lot. And in some way it does. There is some sense that it doesn't always quite click, as if there are things the director could have pushed--or pulled--for greater effect. This isn't something to really judge from the outside, but it's not a masterpiece, which requires some other kind of aesthetic elevation. But it's really good, very good, a movie to see. See it.