Between the Temples

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.

"I taught you. Now you teach me." Carla (Carol Kane)

Between the Temples taught me more about Jewish culture than any other film in recent memory. And it's not nerdy stuff: it's about Cantor Ben (Jason Schwartzman), whose gentile music teacher, Carla, requests Bat Mitsvah for herself even though she's hardly 13 years old. When she was that age, she was not allowed the 13-month preparation due to her parents being communists.

Although Temples is ostensibly a comedy, for which its screwball dialogue is a testament, it is really about different cultures adjusting to the changes that outsiders eventually bring. Having lost his wife to a freak accident a year ago, Ben is understandably distracted until Carla re-enters his life bringing romance and a host of cultural cliches, like a pushy mother trying to arrange a marriage for him. See the Shabbat dinner for the full explosion of cultural imperatives couched in comedic form.

Adding to his tension is Gabby (Madeline Weinstein), visiting daughter of Ben's Rabbi Bruce (Robert Smigel), who offers kinky sex and Ben's Mother's approval. Weinstein is an at-ease actress easy on her emotions and her look to promise a grand future.

Between the Temples has a breezy, comfortable way about dealing with the challenges so that it makes The Graduate, with its Protestant expectations for Benjamin (Dustin Hoffman) look unassuming, and Benjamin's affair with Mrs. Robinson (Anne Bancroft) negligible.

Director/writer Nathan Silver and co-writer C. Mason Wells a keep the jokes coming, e.g., the biggest menu of any restaurant scene in the history of film and Ben saying even his name is in the past. The film shows how much pain change can bring while it also delivers a whole lot of love. Pursuing your own likes makes its way to the head of the class for happiness, age and cultural differences be damned.

Schwartzman has never been better as the vulnerable Jew, and Carol Kane has never been as attractive, regardless of her age. Heck, look at 19-year-old Harold and 80-year-old Maude; thank you Hal Ashby and Cat Stevens.

Between the Temples is a 2024 "comedy" directed by Nathan Silver. "Comedy" in quotations because this is really not a 'haha' comedy life American audiences are used to, but a drama with a universal lens of levity and funny *life* moments. There really aren't many examples of this genre in western media, but in many eastern movies and TV shows, this would easily slot into the genre called "Slice of Life". There are so few that the only one that I can think of off the top of my head is the masterpiece novel Cannery Row by John Steinbeck. Undoubtably, this was made with much love and many winks for Jewish audiences, as the punctuated laughter throughout my viewing showed, but underneath that is a very pure, human, down to earth story about the healing power of human connection.

For starters, the dialogue and especially the layered dialogue performances by all the characters throughout the film are so real, it's uncanny at times. We can't help at laugh and cringe at awkward dinner scenes that are so like the ones many of us have been apart of in our lives. The script is tight, and the story flows beautifully, although it might not be clear until the end where the story is going. This is something that is just going to be inherent to the genre because, like life, it's not clear what the story arc is until it's over. The film is also very timeless, as it's based around a small community and makes very infrequent use of technology or modern plot devices. It could as easily have been made in 1980 as in 2024. I have some gripes about the photography of the film, but its undeniable that there is a cozy and timeless feel to the whole movie. Solid acting jobs all around by the entire cast. I'm not sure that anyone particularly stood out beyond the great dialogue writing, but everyone played their part well. In this absolutely charming, down to earth story about human connection, the most stunning moments are often the most mundane -- just moments when the two leads are in on room together, riffing back and forth.

As you can tell, I'm exceptionally charmed by this film, but there are a couple negative things I can note. For one, the choice to use a very dated 90s digital photography setup didn't do much for me. The picture was very noisy, and I'm not sure that any of the film's great qualities would be taken away if a modern 2024 digital photography setup was used. Another thing is that the film is very Jew-centric and therefore non Jewish audiences will inevitably miss a lot of jokes. I knew there were quite a few camera gags that I didn't understand, but the Jewish audience members were howling at. Nonetheless, I still think the underlying film is great. A few genre-specific points as well: it's not quite clear for much of the film as to where the film is going, or even how long the timeline of the film is. Silver does a decent job at re-grounding the audience periodically as to what is happening when, but it can still be a bit confusing due to the way the film is edited. The film purports to be over the course of 3ish weeks, but it could easily have been over the course of a few months. A minor gripe, but still.

As the gap between critical acclaim for this film and audience despair widens, I have to say that I think this is a case of the media not being to the western audience's tastes. That's totally understandable, so if a cozy and somewhat funny human interest story appeals to you, then please please please give Between the Temples a watch!

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.