Você Se Lembra de Dolly Bell?

Post written by a person nicknamed No Gods, perhaps just proves that this movie may not be for consumption by audiences outside of the Balkans. He/she completely missed the point. There's so much more to this movie, watching it was of great joy and delight for me.

It gives an honest, simple and raw account of Sarajevo realities back in the 1960s, when it was an expanding city in Tito's Yugoslavia. 'Dolly Bell' offers many memorable snapshots that it uses as setting: teenagers mimicking Adriano Celentano, audiences watching 'Rome by night', couples with children dreaming of moving into new housing complexes built by the communist government, lunches with extended family members, community center struggling to buy instruments for their band.....etc, etc. And all this while the main character Dino (played by Kusturica's favourite Slavko Stimac) is finding his way through adolescence.

Basically, the movie is Kusturica's and Sidran's love letter to their respective childhoods, which happened to take place during an interesting time in Yugoslav history not too long after World War II when the country was being rebuilt under new social order and a tangible sense of excitement of participating in something good and worthy was felt amongst certain sections of its population.

Kusturica would of course go on to make much more serious and challenging films later in his career, but this one shows his ability to successfully deal with simple stories that are not driven by big, complex ideas and don't have an instantly dramatic setting.

Quite simply, this is - together with "When Father Was Away on Business" - Kusturica's best film. Stylistically, the film is quite different from Kusturica's later efforts, starting with "Time of the Gypsies", but this film needs no flashy style to impress you; it is the way Kusturica tells the story and the nature of characters that draws you in instantaneously. A lot of it has to do with the screenwriter Abdulah Sidran who also worked with Kusturica on the follow-up "When Father..." (which, incidentally, deals with the same family), and who more than successfully translated his, Kusturica's and, in a way, Sarajevo's collective past onto a page (Sidran has a book by the same title) and the basis for the film. In many respect, this is the film that introduced Sarajevo and its cultural idiosyncrasies to the rest of then-Yugoslavia and put it on the country's cultural map. As strange as it may sound, before "Dolly Bell" Sarajevo was, culturally and - to some extent - otherwise, the big unknown to the rest of Yugoslavia - 'tamni vilajet', as it was referred to. The film, however, changed all of that. Whatever you may think of Kusturica and his later films, you cannot deny the superbness and extraordinary importance of his early works. See them and enjoy.

In a style that reminds us of Italian neo-realism of last century forties and fifties, Kusturica gives us in syncopated sequences the story of a not so wealthy family whose head is a die-hard Marxist who still believes that communism will come in 2000 (this movie dates back to 1981). The youngsters of the family, however and like youngsters all over the world, are more inclined to rock music than to communism. The story develops itself in episodes of great realism in terms of images, against the background of socialist Yugoslavia which appears here and there in the speeches of a local official who thinks that juvenile delinquency can be fought by creating a juvenile rock ensemble in a club, in the Marxist talk of the old father and in the efforts he makes to get a house provided by the State to replace the squalid dwelling where the family lives. Ironically this will come only after his death. Behind the apparent simplicity of the story we feel that its characters have deepness of feelings and reactions, being very human. Love is present in its various forms though shown almost bashfully. The love between father and son and the love between the son and the young prostitute for instance. The action takes place in Bosnia but nothing in the movie makes us to surmise the bloodbath that occurred there 20 years after. In conclusion we can say this is a good and well made movie.

Kusturica is something of a challenge for me to parse. The experience is a bit troubling because it seems so genuine that we should be ashamed for intruding. He does not seem to accomplish this by ordinary means. Yes, the acting is good, but what works here is something quite a bit deeper than usual.

Instead of the world of the film coming to us, as is usually the case, he inserts the camera in such a way that we – or rather our intent to see – brings it into being. This is an early film, and already he seems to have mastered the art of composition. This has a couple of his trademarked panning sequences that are the most elaborately choreographed I know. But more than that, each scene progresses through what seems to be an ordered diorama of gypsy projection. It is intensely human. I can imagine the filmmaker crying as he blocks the shot and places the actors, lights, camera.

I can imagine him obsessing over how objects and shadows form families that work the way the central family does here. I can see his passion in how he guides the camera in arcs that are unnatural. It is a wonder he continued to make films, such is the obvious cost.

A lost nation. A lost larger family. A lost love. Do we remember? Can you?

Because I encounter young filmmakers, and see their first works, I know it is possible to spring whole into the art, allowing open completion of soul to make up for insufficient craft. As time went on, Emir learned to layer humor and circumstance, to tell a story. But nothing he will do can match this, his first love.

Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.

whichever corner of the balkans is called home, it is all but unuarguable that Kusturica is the region's greatest filmmaker. i have enjoyed all of his films - most especially "Otac na sluzbenom putu" and "Underground" - but none disturbed me quite like this one disturbed me.

the reason is that he portrays a (former) Yugoslavia i do not know, and have never known. both my parents fled the "acceptable face of communism" during the very years this film shows almost nostalgically. they were roughly the same age as the main character, yet their experience of Tito's paradise was completely and utterly apposite to what Kusturica shows on the screen. the world they knew was one of deprivation and disappearances and harassment and they could not get away from it fast enough.

i am not saying either viewpoint is right or wrong. i just find it eye-openingly disturbing that the same place at the same time can be remembered in such radically different ways.

i believe there is a lesson in that for all of us, especially those of us whose roots lie in the balkans.