Tre colori - Film bianco

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.

Krzysztof Kieslowski's second of the Three Colors trilgy' "White" (1994), is a much more simple film than its predecessor, "Blue" (1993).

We follow Karol, who is divorced from Dominique, who cruelly attempts to hurt Karol in the worst ways possobly, especially considering her still loves her deeply.

Visually, it is almost as impressive a film as "Blue", also drawing on symbolism in its visual storytelling, and the acting is brilliant - particularly Julie Delpy portraying Dominique.

In spite of an interesting plot, I did not find the film to be nearly as touching as "Blue", but rather cruel in its message and execution.

For me, definitely a weaker film than its predecessor, but holding several qualities of its own. I wouldn't recommend anyone to see this as a must-see - especially from the trilogy.

Your pretty wife, has decided to divorce, as you're impotent and not hung like a horse, your debit card is taken, your lost, lonely, forsaken, and you're feeling rather low, full of remorse. A chance encounter gets you back to your homeland, to Poland where you hatch the perfect plan, to avenge all of the strife, from your uncaring ex-wife, and make you feel like you're actually a man.

Karol Karol goes from zero to hero as he takes his life from the depths of despair to the heights of a wealthy and successful businessman, in order to exact his cunning revenge on the wife that belittled and scorned him. A little bit daft and wholly unimaginable but mildly entertaining in a comical kind of way.

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.