I saw this film at the Berlinale 2013. Upfront I have to reveal that it worked out much better than I derived from the synopsis on the festival website. It reflects on an elderly couple, being married for 62 years, carefully and compassionately interviewed by their son, all the time letting us wonder how these two got together in the first place. But that is precisely the beauty of what we hear from both sides.
Please be prepared that the father says a lot of non-politically-correct things, like being the head of the family, hence that he makes the decisions (he talks about "convincing", but I rather think that the wife gives in after a while and let him have his way). Also, he was angry when his wife opened a private bank account for her part of the pension (I worked for that pension, and she did nothing). We hear much more such examples.
The mother is honest in saying that the father was her first love. He had a steady job and was good looking when she married him. Nowadays she is very clear in stating that they are very very different, and illustrates this with ample examples. She wanted to go abroad and see the rest of the world, while he preferred to stay home during holidays. She was used to reading books, while he only read newspapers. She needed 15 minutes to iron each shirt (he was used to wearing shirts from his working days, and sees no reason to change when retired), while she rather had him wearing T-shirts instead. She had a fall twice around the bath, but he refused to install a grip because it would make holes and needed to be repaired that when leaving the house in a few years.
All in all, many thanks for this intimate insight in the lives of a couple that was married for 62 years. The aforementioned examples to illustrate their differences make us wonder, however, whether this is not also an indictment against the concept of marriage "till dead us do part", to uphold the relationship against all logic when people find out they really don't match. This couple has obviously coped with their differences, regrettably by one of them always being the first to give in. I can imagine that this couple is far from unique, married in a time that a separation was not an option.
Please be prepared that the father says a lot of non-politically-correct things, like being the head of the family, hence that he makes the decisions (he talks about "convincing", but I rather think that the wife gives in after a while and let him have his way). Also, he was angry when his wife opened a private bank account for her part of the pension (I worked for that pension, and she did nothing). We hear much more such examples.
The mother is honest in saying that the father was her first love. He had a steady job and was good looking when she married him. Nowadays she is very clear in stating that they are very very different, and illustrates this with ample examples. She wanted to go abroad and see the rest of the world, while he preferred to stay home during holidays. She was used to reading books, while he only read newspapers. She needed 15 minutes to iron each shirt (he was used to wearing shirts from his working days, and sees no reason to change when retired), while she rather had him wearing T-shirts instead. She had a fall twice around the bath, but he refused to install a grip because it would make holes and needed to be repaired that when leaving the house in a few years.
All in all, many thanks for this intimate insight in the lives of a couple that was married for 62 years. The aforementioned examples to illustrate their differences make us wonder, however, whether this is not also an indictment against the concept of marriage "till dead us do part", to uphold the relationship against all logic when people find out they really don't match. This couple has obviously coped with their differences, regrettably by one of them always being the first to give in. I can imagine that this couple is far from unique, married in a time that a separation was not an option.
