Ober

"It's really funny to see this poor guy being used as boxing equipment by almost everyone." - says another commentator. Excuse me? What is so funny about that? I have watched that film patiently; I have live in Holland long enough to understand what most other foreign viewers would experience as just simply plain stupid - but if you think that broad audience outside of the Netherlands is going to appreciate this film, you are sadly mistaken. It was boring, with nudity, sex and slapping filling the gaps in the poor written story - and actually far worse than many of the really strong Dutch films I have seen. The only moment I found funny was with 4 Africans - there is a good point there about the "quality" of a Ducthman as a lover!

I am pleased to report that Alex van Warmerdam's "OBER" was well received by the audience at yesterday's Toronto International Film Festival screening. Spectators can be fickle at 9:45 a.m., and it is a testament to the director's talent that his film elicited a laugh-out-loud response from beginning to end.

I tend to be skeptical of films from the Netherlands. I'm no philistine, but I have encountered several movies from this region that I can only describe as "weird." Now, I won't claim that there aren't unusual elements in this film, but they are employed in the service of comedy rather than abstraction.

Warmerdam, himself, plays Edgar, a middle-aged waiter who suffers through confrontations with his belligerent customers, unruly neighbours, his chronically ill wife, and his demanding mistress. Warmerdam's dead-pan performance is so consistent that the passivity that defines his character is not compromised when Edgar visits Herman, the screen-writer who is controlling his destiny; he is simply worn out, and has come to request, not demand, that his life might be propelled in a more agreeable direction.

Herman concedes, but as any screen-writer will attest, a compelling narrative requires conflict. The various fates that are in store for Edgar are, yes, unusual at times, but the comedy is particularly strong in this film because each trajectory is so "unexpected." Another festival film this year is "STRANGER THAN FICTION," (w/ Will Farrell & Dustin Hoffman) which has a similar premise. It was sold out before my tickets were assembled, so I can't assess whether or not it is as successful in its execution as OBER. I do feel, however, that Warmerdam's film has the potential to satisfy a wider audience than it will ever encounter, and I would urge people to seek it out. It is a film with great depth, but it needs to be emphasized that, first and foremost, OBER works as an accessible comedy that even the most skeptical movie-lovers will enjoy.

Most films about human life's ordinary characters are able to charm audiences as they depict the true feelings of human beings. Dutch film 'Ober' is one such film which succeeds enormously as it has chosen a very good theme. It is in the form of the depiction of a waiter who can be hailed as the most ordinary of all ordinary people. Director Alex Van Warmerdam is able to add extra strength to his film by playing the leading role. As the film begins, Alex is shown to bear all insults with utmost coolness and fortitude. However, as the film progresses, Alex decides to ask tough questions about his fate. This situation gives rise to a series of hilarious encounters with screen writers who exercise absolute control over their characters and their fates. In the field of art, an artist is given complete control to develop the characters. One must nevertheless ask the most pertinent questions : Who controls the life of a character ? Is it the character himself/herself who controls his/her destiny ? Does the character have an independent existence ? These questions do not have simple answers as a lot of subjective perspectives do come into picture. Director Alex Van Warmerdam makes a good try at answering them in his film "Ober". His film is a poignant plea for respecting all human beings regardless of their foibles.

Edgar (Alex van Warmerdam) is an ageing waiter with a life as empty as the spacious highway restaurant in which he works. His mistress sits at a table hoping to get some attention from him in a last desperate attempt to rescue their sinking relationship. Some guests take advantage Edgar's serving position to humiliate him in a spectacle of absurdity. Edgar is at the bottom, and sees only one way out - to complain to the writer of the story to get better lines or at least a shimmer of happiness in his life.

This is a peculiar piece of film. A character complaining to the writer about the misery in his life is one thing, but the side characters come along as well, and the writer's girlfriend who interferes with their fate as well Nothing good can come out of this. Edgar not only lives his misery but realises that the creator of his fate is pushing him through the absurdity on purpose. When Edgar complains about his submissive suffering, all the writer can do to justify himself is telling Edgar that he must suffer. When Edgar protests, the writer retorts that he knows what he has in store for Edgar, as if there is some higher purpose for Edgar's suffering. But that is bluff. The writer does not know where he is going with his story and merely sends Edgar off on a chase from misery to surreal.. 

The pace of the movie is upbeat is the first half, but when we get a key scene in the thriller aspect of it, the acquisition of a weapon, the movie grinds down to a halt! Edgar walks into a bashed-up curiosities cabinet, asks for the weapon, to which the owner, an old man dressed up as a woman, proceeds to get it down and wrap it up with a painfully slow imprecision. The audience can nail-bitingly complain all they like, but they will have to wait till he is finished for Edgar to get out of there to solve his problems in the last leg of the story. When you submit to the will of the director of the film you too have to sit through the lot, just like Edgar and the other characters.

As the movie does not really go anywhere, as far as the story is concerned, it is tempting to dismiss the entire film, despite its originality. We see the writer, although he is just a character in the film, and can not help but curse his incompetence at creating an incoherent, illogical story. But at the same time, it is that same incompetent writer which put the brilliant dry humoured dialogues into the script which had the audience laughing out loud. Still clearly one of the most original directors in European cinema today, do not miss out on him, but if you have not seen any of his work yet, start with Little Tony or The Northerners, leaving this one for later.

Edgar is a waiter in a mediocre restaurant. I could go on, talking about his bedridden wife, his lover, her overprotective brother. But to do so would be to miss the point of this sublime exercise of the writer's art. Ober was my introduction to the films of Alex van Warmerdam and is still my favourite of the many wonderful movies he has produced. On one level it's a black comedy, on another it's an exercise in surrealism, on another level it's an existential movie that asks "What would your life be like if you could talk to your creator". And, on every level, it is completely hilarious. I totally disagree with the reviewer who complains about it being subtitled. I don't speak a lot of Dutch so perhaps that makes a difference, but the actors speaking their native tongue produce an energy in the dialog that is completely lost in dubbed movies, IMO. I cannot praise this film enough. It made me laugh like a loon, it made me cry, it made me think, and I kept thinking about it long after it had finished. That makes it a work of art, in my book.