Drei Farben - Weiß

Ostensibly Kieslowski chose white of the French flag to make a movie on equality. Equality if it can be reached in marriage, makes it work. Marriage is rocked when an equilibrium is not reached. A dove can be caressed and be a symbol of peace and purity; a dove can defecate and dirty as well

White in the movie is used as an epiphany of the joyous moments in marriage. The doves are weaved in Kieslowski visually and aurally to accentuate the marriage as a rite of passage in life. He brings in the phrase "light at the end of the tunnel" towards the end of the film. There is another marriage, that of Mikolaj in the subplot that also survives in a strange way.

The film begins with divorce proceedings and ends with the wife signalling the reinstatement of the wedding ring on her finger. The film begins with husband recalling the wedding that has failed. The doves flying overhead unload excreta on him. Towards the end of the film, the husband again recalls the wedding as he sets off for the wife's prison.

Kieslowski's treatise on equality is based on marriage as a great leveller with the doves flutter captured on the soundtrack appearing as a frequent reminder of marital bonds. It even appears in the underground metro, an unlikely place if you have a logical mind. You have to throw away logic if you need to enjoy this film.

There are aspects of the film that are obviously unrealistic. Putting a grown man in a suitcase and letting the suitcase go through airport security is not feasible. Moreover, the director shows the heavy suitcase perched precariously on a luggage cart. Impossible to believe all these details.

But the deeper question is whether Kieslowski was using marriage as a metaphor for politics? There is the mention of the Russian corpse with the head crushed for sale, there is a mention of the neon sign that sputters...The name Karol Karol seems reminiscent of Kafka.

Sex in this film is not to be taken at face value. Impotence of Karol Karol at strategic points of the film is deceptive. He apparently does more than hair care for women clients at his hair care parlor in Poland (suggested, not shown). I have a great admiration for Polish cinema, having gown up watching works of Wajda and Zanussi. I met Kieslowski in 1982 when he attended an international film festival in Bangalore, India, promoting his film "Camera Buff," another film with Jerzy Stuhr, who plays Jurek in "White". I took note of "Camera Buff" but I could not imagine the director of "Camera Buff" would evolve into a perfectionist a decade later. Stuhr has been metamorphosed from a live wire in "Camera Buff" to an effeminate colleague of Karol Karol in "White". "White" is a carefully made work with support of other top Polish directors in the wings--Zanussi and Agniezka Holland.

Although the film is heavy in symbolism, it is also a parody. Karol Karol comes to kill with a blank bullet and a real one. Did he plan that out, when he did not know who he was going to shoot?

The performances are all brilliant--the good Polish, Hungarian, and Czech filmmakers extract performances from their actors that could humble Hollywood directors, because the stars are not the actors but the directors. Great music. Great photography. And a very intelligent script.

This is a major film of the nineties--providing superb wholesome entertainment and food for thought. The film deservedly won Kieslowski the "best director" award at the Berlin Film festival in 1994. It is sad for the world of cinema that Kieslowski is no longer with us.

Review In A Nutshell:

White tells the story of a male Polish hairdresser, Karol, who was left by his wife, Dominique, with nothing. He deals with this loss by going back to Poland and rebuilding himself.

The first I noticed when going through this film was how light it all felt, all the weight that I felt on the director's previous film, Blue, were mostly lifted. I wasn't so much disappointed with the change in tone as there are many moments in this film where the plot and narrative benefited from it, but I was underwhelmed by Kieslowski's execution. The director couldn't seem to make me feel comprehensively invested to the protagonist, as I personally felt he wasn't explored enough and the intentions of the character wasn't truly clear to me throughout.

Thankfully I enjoyed the journey that the protagonist has taken, as we get to see him start off on the bottom of the world, figuratively speaking of course, and building himself up slowly to becoming a respectable and "fulfilled" man. He doesn't reach this stage without playing dirty of course, Karol is still a normal human being and would do whatever he can in order to get ahead, but it was handled in such a way that we don't think less of him. I saw this rebuilding as just a constructive coping mechanism towards the tragic loss he just suffered, and I think in a way all of what he has made for himself was all for her or at least something to prove to her. During the film's third act, we can see that he is still in pain and even though he could get anything he wants there is still a void in him that hasn't been filled, and that is love. It was her love that he has always wanted, and he blames himself for not being able to show and prove that to her during their marriage. For Karol, content doesn't come from wealth, respect and fame, it comes from Dominique.

The film's photography was also a major change from the first film of the trilogy. Colors seem to be warmer, and the color seems to dominate a lot of the film's images, possibly enforcing the idea of purity and beauty. It connects really well with the film's plot and narrative, making certain situations coming off as comically charged rather than dire, giving us a glimpse of how the film would feel during its resolution. The score also was change from the previous film, switching from the grand and dramatic tone to something much lighter and sharper. I found the score to be effective, particularly during the moments where the film wants us to feel sorry for Karol or when he examines or thinks about his one true love, Dominique. We are able to understand his fascination with her, and the music helps support that.

Zbigniew Zamachowski plays the film's protagonist, Karol. He was wonderful in the role, though it wasn't at the same level of amazing as Binoche in Blue. The actor was able to manipulate my feelings towards the character, with one moment feeling highly sorry then the next moment feeling proud of what he has become. He was able to change the appearance of his exterior while keeping his internal qualities the same. Julie Delpy was also pretty good in the role, but it would have been better if she was given a bit more screen time; then again this is Karol's story, not hers.

White may not be a step up as I hoped it would be from Blue, but it's still a great piece of work from Kieslowski. Hopefully Red would be at least just as good as this, if not better.

While 'Three Colours: White' may be the weakest of Krzysztof Kieslowski's "Three Colours Trilogy", that is in no way saying that it is a bad film (to me it was actually still an extremely good one) and that it's testament to the trilogy's consistently high overall quality.

'Three Colours: White' could have been a little longer to give more development to the two leads' relationship and to Julie Delpy's character perhaps, and there are a couple of parts that do strain credibility. On the whole though, it is an entertaining, sad and thought-provoking examination of equality and revenge with a story detailing love on the rocks and the aftermath of Poland's Communist Regime.

Again it is very symbolic, especially in the linking to the protagonist's past (this time with a coin and a Marianna plaster bust) and again the recycling of bottles that ties in with the film's main theme of equality. This symbolism is this said intriguing and visually arresting, instead of being incoherent, one may not get the significance of it at first but reading up about the film and analyses of it has proved to be tremendously insightful.

Visually, 'Three Colours: White' is every bit as visually stunning as the previous film 'Three Colours: Blue'. The scenery is intentionally not flattering but at the same time it is also affectionate, and the film is exquisitely shot with the use of colour bold and striking. The music is not quite as symbolic as in 'Blue', but is still very much inspired and cleverly used, with a dark jauntiness to match the blackly comedic nature of the film and also a little pathos to mirror the emotions of the protagonist.

Writing is of the true black comedy/dry humour kind, enough to make one laugh heartily and cry unashamedly, with plenty of funny and poignant moments as well as blunt and thought-provoking ones. Kieslowski's direction is never intrusive.

Zbigniew Zamachowski excels par excellence in his tragicomic role, a very funny and nuanced turn. Julie Delpy's role is not as interesting, but she does bring a formidable edge and sensuality to it.

On the whole, the weakest of the trilogy but still extremely good. 9/10 Bethany Cox

It is not only difficult to comment separately on the three parts of Kieslowski's trilogy, it seems obvious that the filmmaker wants us to do just the opposite: view them in order, Blue, White, and Red, and consider them together as one complete work. It is true they are distinct stories with distinct themes: liberty, equality, fraternity, and each them is developed with unique applications of intrigue and artistry. They are each well worth seeing independently, but I believe they are best seen as one work. Collectively, I would rate the trilogy as a 9; separately, I place each in my top ten for the years 1993 and 1994.

White is the fabric of a bride, chaste and pure at the outset of her marriage; later it is the flash of an orgasm in the dark; and then .... But any more said of the instances of white in this film might spoil it for the first-time viewer. Unlike Three Colors: Blue, White is a more plot-oriented movie, with two main characters to Blue's one. And this is as it should be. Blue's theme of Liberty, the first word of France's motto, is an individual's principle, while White's theme of Equality, the French motto's second word, requires at least two people. The central quest for liberty is personal; the struggle for equality is fundamentally social. White is the most conventional of the three Color films, and while it is still one of my ten top films of 1994, I rate it an 8, slightly less than the highly visual Blue and the mind-bending Red.

I love the entire Three Colors trilogy, but "White" is my sentimental favorite because I sympathize so deeply with the hero. I've experienced the same kind of competitive, destructive love that drives Karol throughout this movie, and I'm also a nerdy schmuck like he is, so I found myself really commiserating with him.

Unfortunately, "White" has acquired a reputation as the weakest entry in the series. I think it's the odd one out, but certainly not the worst. It's the only one of the three that regularly stretches credibility (the plot twists are really wild), and the only one with a male protagonist, but it's also the most exciting of the films and, ultimately, the most disturbing. The ending in particular is a killer.

"Red" tinkers a bit with "White"; in fact, if I'm not mistaken, it entirely changes the resolution of this film for the worse. That's too bad. "White" works best on its own, as a pessimistic movie, without the more optimistic outlook of "Red" grafted on in retrospect. But since both films are so great on their own, I'm not too bothered by their failure to gel properly.