Takva, l'homme qui craint Dieu

Saw Takva last night at The Sydney Film Festival 2007, utterly compelling, driven by Erkan Can's fine performance as Muharrem, a devout Muslim in contemporary Istanbul. Previous posts outline more.

I was fascinated by the way Takva engages with contemporary Turkey, a notionally democratic and secular society since the 1920s. Yes, Muharrem has an existential crisis, also familiar to audiences of Shrek 3 in another way ... dare I mention it, by profane comparison.

I suspect Takva has a satirical streak, once you imagine the dervishs's lodge could be the current government of Turkey.

Am I right? Responses from Turkish members most welcome.

It's a good movie to get know a profile of the religious Muslims, to get know "sects" and the amazing, fascinating worship of them. To find answers to the questions like; "how does a sect process and what's happening inside of a sect?". But it doesn't give a political message, a movie that "sit on the fence". But I congratulate the director for at least his bravery to submit these kind of sources and to try to answer some questions or to ask some questions. The main actor Erkan Can has a great performance.

Besides the musics that are made by Replicas, (Gokce Akcelik) are great. Enjoy...

I think it goes much to far to call this excellent film a documentary about the life of a Muslim sect or a critique of political Islam or even the role of the religious orders in Turkish economic life. Rather I would like to claim that it gives just an impression of the life Turkish religious orders, society and the mind of a devout religious man who previously led a uncritical life without real challenges and without deep thoughts about practical life and religion. Therefor he's unprepared for both of it.

I would guess that one could find his "state of mind" also with a range of uncritical believers of many religions who, although ardently believe stay shallow in their intellectual penetration of their believe and worldly life. They stay rather caught in conservative dogmas, which where made to control man and are far away from a healthy human experience.

Not everything shown in Film should be taken at face value. The depiction of the ritual life gives an impression of the ecstatic quality of such gatherings but is exaggerated in their frenetic appearance. There may have been reasons for this depiction but one should rather try not to confuse it with the an authentic account; this account one should rather get in contact with real orders.

The protagonist has high values which he fails to satisfy. This puts him in a moral dilemma which is very instructively set in contrast on one hand to worldly every day people and merchants with their cheating and accommodation with an imperfect world. On the other there is a religious order, which although is directed towards spirituality is of course also involved in worldly enterprises and has of course it financial interests. Nothing gets euphemised but the problems of both - profane and spiritual - get expounded in a way that a psychological profile of shallow but devote believer meets social criticism (not only hitting the Turkish Islamic milieu of its setting but also similar ones in other regions and religions).

This is a rare example of an inner look at the Islamic sects and their organizations. Although the movie is a fiction, at times you may think you are watching a documentary of a Turkish Islamic sect and its rituals.

Tha main character, Muharrem is a devout and simple believer and a follower of the sect. He gets selected by his Efendi (sheikh of the sect) for collecting the rent money of the sect. This purely financial act affects Muharrem morally and psychologically.

Erkan Can plays an excellent Muharrem. Guven Kirac (Rauf the vice sheikh) and Meray Ulgen (the sheikh) are very very believable in their roles.

This probably one of the finest examples of the new Turkish cinema.

The film is about a devoted man to God and his rise in a Way of Islamic society. The film focuses on an ordinary man's Islamic life to his interference with money affairs and the results of it. The psychological state of the man is analyzed from sociological way as well.

The film is great from two main aspects. The first aspect is Erkan Can's wonderful role play. Enormous acting performance. Just unbelievable. The other great side is, the film is shot at real historical places of Istanbul.

The only weakness of the film is the end part of it. The enormous entrance the psychological and sociological perfectness in the beginning was not given in as good as beginning.

Moreover as a philosopher I would like to comment that this film gives a side of Islamica philosophy both its sociology.