Footnote

Footnote, one of the five nominees for Best Foreign Language films at the Oscars earlier this year, boasts two extraordinary performances. And it's absolutely vital that those two performances are pitch perfect, because the key to the film's drama and tension lies in those particular characters.

The premise is fairly straightforward. A father and son are both philogy professors at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Eliezer Shkolnik is an old school researcher who believes findings are only valid if research is conducted in the proper scientific method, while his son, Uriel, follows the more modern philosophy. Eliezer loathes the popularity and acceptance of the current methods, and is so stubborn he even refuses to cancel one of his classes even though only one student is signed.

Having background on research methods or philology is not necessary however, when it comes to following along the movie. Shlomo Bar'aba and Lior Ashkenazi, as Eliezer and Uriel respectively, both make sure to humanize their characters and portray their conflicting ideals by showcasing conflicting personalities as wells.

The plot gets really interesting when Eliezer finds out he has been voted the winner of the Israel Prize, forcing him to rethink how he feels his colleagues, and the field in general. However, Uriel soon gets a phone call that will shake things up even more.

Unfortunately, Footnote does not deliver a satisfying conclusion, at least not a memorable one. The tension is slowly built up really well as the film cuts deeper into the plot, yet when the time comes for a huge clash, the film ends up kinds of just floating around not knowing the right time to fade out. However, the meat of the film is too good to be ignored, as both Bar'aba and Ashkenazi deliver performances you won't soon forget.

It's not like this is a bad movie but it's just one like dozens of others, that get made each year, mostly in Europa or as little art-house movies in America. When watching this movie I just couldn't help wondering what was supposed to be so special about it. In my opinion there is nothing special about it really but that of course does not make this a bad movie to watch as well.

It's simply an enjoyable and light little movie, that doesn't ever get too heavy handed, even though it could had easily gone that way. And I thank the movie for that but at the same time it's also giving too little in return.

The movie is taking a more comedy approach to its buildup but with as a problem that there isn't really any true comedy in this movie. It sort of reminded me of a Wes Anderson movie. They are supposed to be comical movies, without anything comical ever happening in it really. It's just not my favorite style of film-making but I know I'm probably a minority on this, so to most people, this won't be a complaint at all.

It's a movie with a good enough story, that ensures that the movie keeps going at all time. It's definitely not a boring movie to watch, despite of a slower type of approach at times.

I wasn't the biggest fan of its visual and technical approach though. I don't know, I guess I have just seen a bit too many movies like this already, so I'm sort of starting to get fed up with these type of movies looking all the same with its camera-handling and editing, that all should remind you of a more indie type of movie. I really did wish that this movie would bad done some more new and interesting stuff at times. That way I would had, no doubt, got more into the movie and would had found it more interesting and pleasant to watch all. It now instead is not a movie that I can wholeheartedly or enthusiastically recommend to you, since it just isn't ever doing anything special, with its story, characters or visuals.

Certainly not bad and still quite good for what it is but it's still a movie you could so easily do without.

7/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

This is a very good movie, but it could be better. The feel of the whole story very much reminded me of the Coen Brothers movie 'a serious man'. It has the same sense of general awkwardness in its characters. The story is very well told. It has a chapter structure and the parts of father and son have kind of symmetry to it, resulting in a feeling of bittersweet irony. If you like irony in all its layers and subtleties, then this is definitely something to watch. The one thing that could make this movie better in my opinion, is the climax that the whole movie is building up to, but which is left to your imagination. In my taste a little too much so, but decide for yourself!

The fictitious hero is a old man who takes himself and his work completely seriously-- to the exaggerated extent that we expect to find only in a fable. The screen displays to the audience a number of arch textual explanations about him and his son, and the audience chuckles at his eccentric single-mindedness. But a sort of tension appears as the characters' behavior slips outside the limits of the explanations. Is the old man cheating on his wife? What's behind his grandson's oblomovism? Eventually the movie focuses on an unknown that is stretched almost to the point of paradox: Is the quality of the old man's work in academe really unsurpassed, or is it really unsatisfactory? The movie does turn out to be a fable, and a fable worth taking seriously. It attracted an all-star cast, and Shlomo Bar-Abba, in the lead, continues the tradition of comedians who, when they undertake a dramatic role, gain additional impact from the contrast with their familiar persona. The movie received the 2011 screenplay award at Cannes.

FOOTNOTE is an appropriately titled sparklingly intelligent and entertaining film written and directed by Joseph Cedar. With a small cast and a focused story this little film form Israel is not only a pleasure to watch as a story performed as shared by brilliant actors, but it is also one of the most visually artistic and creative venture of cinematography to be on the small screen in a long time: the genius cinematographer is Yaron Scharf. Add to this a musical score that enhances every moment of the story - courtesy of composer Amit Poznansky - and the film simply succeeds on every level.

In a most ingenious way we are introduced to the two main characters - father and son, both professors in the Talmud department of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. The film opens on the confused and somewhat unattached facial expression of the seated father Eliezer Shkolnik (Shlomo Bar Aba) as he listens to his ebullient son Uriel Shkolnik (Lior Ashkenazi) being inducted into the prestigious Israeli academic union. Uriel's acceptance speech reflects his childhood when his father informed him upon questioning that he was a 'teacher' - an occupation the young Uriel found embarrassing at the time, but now honors his father for this guidance. After the ceremony we slowly discover that there is a long-standing rivalry between father and son. Uriel has an addictive dependency on the embrace and accolades that the establishment provides, while Eliezer is a stubborn purist with a fear and profound revulsion for what the establishment stands for, yet beneath his contempt lies a desperate thirst for some kind of recognition: his only clam to fame after long years of intensive research is that the man who published his findings mentions Eliezer in a footnote. When it comes times for the Israel Prize, Israel's most prestigious national award, to be awarded, a clerical error results in a telephone call informing Eliezer that he has won, while in reality the award was meant for his son Uriel. How this error is resolved open all manner of windows for examining family relationships, fame, pure academia, and forgiveness.

The film is an unqualified success. Lior Ashkenazi (so well remembered from 'Walk on Water' and 'Late Marriage' among others) gives a bravura performance and that of Shlomo Ben Aba balances it in quality. The supporting cast is strong. Joseph Cedar has produced a fine film very much enhanced by the brilliance of the cinematography that tells the story as much as the dialogue.

Grady Harp