Sarlatán

The biographical film Sarlatan is good, it is worth seeing because it describes the life and destiny of an interesting and controversial character. The life of the main character is totally atypical and includes both good and evil. On the one hand he was completely dedicated to the work of a healer, treating 200 people a day of all kinds of diseases, on the other hand he was a sadomasochist, with accents of madness when torturing and killing animals or when self-mutilating or with accents of murderer when he proposes to the man he lived with to kill his unborn child... A person with extraordinary abilities but also with an obvious mental and emotional imbalance. It bothered me that the film did not show clearly what was the situation of the character towards the end of his life, namely the fact that he was sentenced to 5 years in prison and not killed and that after his release he did not deal with healing.

Beautifully constructed movie that tugs at your heartstrings for cheering on a gifted maligned healer that miraculously healed countless and yet makes one recoil at his own selfish monstrosity of forcing his wants and needs upon the one most dependant on him for livelihood. In the end, his monstrosity prevailed to continue do what he always did to survive. It was control, possession, ownership and instinct to look out for his own life that mattered. Despite his gift to heal, he failed to save his own own soul by sacrificing real love for survival.

Charlatan is a 2020 Czech-Polish-Irish-Slovak drama well shot by Agnieszka Holland based loosely on the healer Jan Mikolásek (1889-1973), who cured hundreds of people using plant-based remedies ,already a local institution in Czechoslovakia before World War II, the healer gains in reputation and wealth both during the Nazi occupation and under Communist rule. It was selected as the Czech entry for the Best International Feature Film at the 93rd Academy Awards . It won five awards including Best Film at the 2021 Czech Lion Awards . This is a nice historical drama about Jan Mikolasek, a Czech herbalist who, by analyzing the urine of his patients, was able to diagnose diseases and cure them with medicinal herbs . He was an ambiguous character who assisted both , Nazi during the occupation and the communists after the war ; one after the other, each regime wants to use his skills and in return give him protection . But lost the support of the Czechoslovak authorities after the death of President Zaptocky, whom he had treated and was arrested and accused of illicit enrichment.

The impressive story of a man gifted with exceptional abilities set against the background of the events of the totalitarian fifties. The life of Jan Mikolásek who was born at the turn of the 20th century, he won fame and fortune using unorthodox plant-based treatment methods to cure a wide range of diseases . He was a well-known and successful Czech healer, who diagnosed and healed people using his intuition and his familiarity with plants. His remedies and prescriptions, although mostly plant-based, included lifestyle and dietary changes. From the urine, he was able to diagnose a disease, which he subsequently treated with herbs. Fresh urine has an amber-yellow color, while brown, for example, indicates a liver problem, and pink to red indicates a bad kidney. A more persistent foam, on the other hand, indicated that the urine contained a higher level of protein. With his helper, he mixed and matched mixtures of 27 plant species. In Jenstejn they consumed up to three tons of herbs a week. The herbs themselves do not have such an effect as their proper combinations. And vice versa, some plants do not get along with each other. In addition to teas, he was also engaged in the production of ointments, various oils, drops and unspecified "powders". Mikolásek also produced two syrups for children. One of them ministered to sick children, the other to children suffering from tuberculosis. He emphasized that the same disease cannot be treated with the same herbs. "For example, two people have the same hair disease, both are men, both are the same age and have the same body composition. And yet, if I prescribe the same thing to both, it will help one and not the other" .He healed not only poor people from the villages but also many well-known people, including the Czechoslovak President, Antonín Zápotocky. Mikolásek's diagnostic methods and notorious healing got the attention of Czechoslovakia's government . He was finally arrested after strychnine was found in the bodies of two men he had treated . Set in Czechoslovakia in 1957, the film shows his arrest and trial but also his previous life and his love affair with his assistant and lover Frantisek Palko.

Ivan Trojan, winner of the Czech Lion to best actor for this role as the herbalist Jan Mikolasek dedicated his life to caring for the sick despite the immense obstacles he faced in his private and public life , he is in charge of giving life to mature Jan, while the actor's son, Josef Trojan, plays the young healer . This thought-provoking and brooding motion picture was compellingly directed by Agnieszka Holland . And winner of 4 Czech Lions, including Best Film, the film was nominated for the Teddy (which recognizes the best LGTBIQ-themed film at the Berlin 2020 festival). This prestigious director Holland has made good films , outstanding the following ones : "Copying Beethoven¨ , ¨Julie walking Home¨ , ¨Washington Square¨, ¨Total Eclipse¨ , ¨The Secret Garden¨, ¨Olivier Olivier¨ , ¨To Kill a Priest¨ , ¨A Woman on her Own¨ and ¨Sunday Children" . Rating 7/10 . Better than average .

Agnieszka Holland is active as a (female) director since halfway the 70's and has produced a very diverse oeuvre. Because there is no real masterpiece in the oeuvre I think she hasn't got the attention she deserves.

Also "Charlatan" is no masterpiece, but it is a very good movie nevertheless. The cinematography is at times very beautiful, but that is not the real attraction of the movie. The real attraction of the movie is that it has a very compex main character in a very complex society, but the movie does not try to explan everything. It is up to the spectator to think about a lot of quenstions after the movie has finished. Benath some of the questions I had after viewing the movie.

The film is a biopic about Jan Mikolasek (1889 - 1973, played by Ivan Trajon (at older age) and his son Josef Trojan (at younger age)). Jan Mikolasek diagnosis people by looking at a bottle of their urine and treats them with extracts of herbs. When later in the film Mikolasek also turns out to be a clairvoyant, the term "charlatan" seems more then justified. Despite its title the film hoewever does not give a clear answer to this question. There are some indications about questianable merchandising (empty bottles to urinate in) around the practice of Mikolasek but on average he is portrayed as a man driven to help his patients and not as a charlatan.

Mikolasek is prosecuted by the communist Czech government. The film is unclear about the motives of the government. The prosecutor calls Mikolasek mockingly a urine oracle, but as we saw before this was in all probability not the case.

The film makes clear that the prosecution is only possible after some former patients of Mikolasek are no longer on positions of power. That is however only about eliminating an obstacle and does not give a cleu about the motives behind the prosecution. Was it the homosexuality of Mikolasek? At one point in the film is remarked that this is against the law, but (again) the film does not provide definite answers.

As dedicated Mitosalek is to his patients, so selfish and blunt he sometimes is to his loved ones. Especially against his assistent and lover Frantisek Palko (Juraj Loj) he is two times real cruel and villainous. Flashbacks to his past agian provide some clues about this inconsistency in his peronality but not the full answer.

One thing is in my opinion not entirely logic. The film is told in flash backs originating from the interrogation during the proces. At other points in the film however, the impression is created that the proces is just a show proces with conclusions already drawn. But why having serious interrogations in a show proces?

Agnieszka Holland has been one of Poland's leading directors for the past few decades. Although she has no particular style, the movies of hers that I've seen were worth seeing. This now includes 2020's "Sarlatán" (sorry, IMDb no longer allows diacritics on consonants, so I can't write the title properly).

The movie tells the true story of Jan Mikolasek, a Czech doctor in the early 20th century whose unorthodox methods caused controversy. When the Nazis occupied Czechoslovakia, they forced him to use his methods for them. Later on, the country's Soviet-backed government prosecuted him (his sexual relations with men probably contributed to this).

More than anything, the movie shows a part of history that most people have probably never heard of; I don't know how many people in Czechia and Slovakia know about Mikolasek, and in particular his sexual orientation. All in all, this is a movie that you should check out (can I say "Czech out"?).