Between the Temples

I was not Bat Mitzvahed, but had the opportunity to learn to read Torah at the age of 50. As soon as I saw a review of this film, I knew that I had to see it. I thoroughly enjoyed myself and was moved on a very personal level.

The performances were superb, the script was sharp and funny. Most of the details were spot-on, many of them recalling my own and my family's experiences. That said, I can understand why viewers who are less familiar with Jewish ritual and culture might be left cold by the film.

Coming to Torah later in life, I, of course, related strongly to Carla's character. The one glaring flaw I felt was the absence of a Torah scroll in film. Reading from the scroll, copied and produced exactly as it had been for milennia, was an overwhelming part of the experience for me. It gave me a connection to ritual and history that I'd never experienced before.

Ben Gottlieb (Jason Schwartzman) is a socially awkward cantor. He runs out of his synagogue and tries to kill himself. Of course, he awkwardly fails and goes to a bar. He doesn't know what to order and starts drinking mudslides. He gets ridiculed by a bully and knocked out. His childhood teacher Carla Kessler (Carol Kane) comes to his aid. Later, she wants his help with her bat mitzvah. Her father was Jewish but she never was.

This is a lot of quirky without much actual laughs. Schwartzman is uncomfortable and weird. The second-hand embarrassment is extremely high in this one. I do love her family restaurant outing. His one crazy move during his family dinner is truly crazy. It is outlandishly crazy as a man without any social skills. The meat and cheese scene could have been funny, but the closeup of Schwartzman eating is too gross. This movie pushes awkward comedy too far and the leads manage to save this with their charms.

Between the Temples in s an exercise in " randomness" without much thought as to how the scenes fit together.

Really? Is this the best the editing could do?

Even the writing is very uneven, as though more than one writer threw out different ideas and then clipped them together.

Some of the scenes were not consistent with the character's personality but it seems as though the anything goes!

I really wanted to like this movie but it did not pick up traction and I was surprised at how little humor there was.

I'm not sure how long it took to make this film but it was disappointing!

So disappointing!

Carol King was terrific !

I loved Between the Temples. Not so much for the slightly predictable plot -- twenty minutes in, you get no prizes for guessing where the story is going -- but for the fresh, improvisational camerawork, for the observations, the attention to the sheer physicality and texture of reality, of bodies, of objects. Some sequences are almost Vertovian: the one where the protagonist watches the video of his younger self, in particular: its tempo is so precise, so funny and poetic, it made me want to applaud.

The references to the cinema of the 70s are so pointed that it occasionally borders on the pastiche; it wasn't before the appearance of the first modern car that I became sure I wasn't watching the reedition of a forgotten vintage indie movie. But, heck, it works, in spite of its occasional weaknesses it's fun, fun, fun.

Not being Jewish myself, it's always hard for me to understand movies about devoutly Jewish people. Like the way parents treat their kids in films about Jewish families seems almost abusive, and I never understand why the kids put up with such controlling behavior. And I'll never understand parents setting their kids up with presumptive spouses, as that wasn't part of my upbringing at all.

So some of the conflicts in "Between the Temples" felt more frustrating than compelling to me, because they seemed so easily resolvable. But otherwise, this is an amiable enough movie that has a sweet performance by Carol Kane. Her complicated relationship with Jason Schwartzmann, a kind of "Harold and Maude" situation that doesn't go quite as far, gives the film its central plot, and the movie is at its best when those two are on screen together.

I didn't care for the film's visual style at all. It's like a John Cassavetes movie, with a roving, jittery camera that zooms in for extreme closeups. The film looks like a documentary, which doesn't fit its tone at all.

Grade: B.