Northfork

It's a shame this movie is rated PG 13--it is really quite suitable for anyone--though young kids might not follow it too well.

It belongs to that wonderful genre of serio-comic ghost/angel stories that would have to include everything from Capra's "It's A Wonderful Life" to Wenders's "Wings of Desire."

The photography is stunning, the acting first rate, and--wonder of wonders--the tone is uplifting.

My only criticism is that there is not much ambiguity in the film. The two interwoven stories seem intriguingly mysterious at first; but they resolve themselves a little too nicely for my taste. As the director points out in his commentary on the DVD, all the ingredients of Irwin's story are on his bedside table. The symbolism is just a trifle too pat for me.

But what a lark! My favorite scene has to be when the relocation team tries to get breakfast at a diner. This is practically theatrical in its magic--a tour de force of witty acting--subtle, playful, and positively rhythmic--coupled with striking cinematography and an acute eye for the grotesque.

"Northfork" is funny, touching, gorgeous to look at, magical (with the above reservations) and has not one single car-chase.

An easy nine stars.

This film played for a criminally short time in Buffalo and of course was gone by the time I wanted to see it. I'm sure the beautifully shot, rugged western landscapes would have been great on a big screen, but unfortunately I had to settle for the video version on my 13" TV. With that said, "Northfork" is that rare and elusive bird of movies: a commercial film that is worthy of the viewer's hour and a half and doesn't manage to be insulting. Despite the career sins of Nick Nolte and Darryl Hannah in the past, don't be turned off by their presence here. They are perfect in their respective roles, Nolte as world-worn mystic and Hannah as enigmatic ghost/angel/vision. Without rehashing a plot summary (which, I might add, is somewhat inaccurate on this site), let me say that "Northfork" is a kind of delirium, alternating between the dreamlife of a dying boy and the surreal landscape of a mostly empty town, peopled only by a handful of eccentric stragglers. The central plot, as it were, revolves around a group of state-sanctioned volunteers given the task of clearing out these final hangers-on before the town is flooded. The six deputized agents, clad in black and issued identical black sedans, speak in detached, banal fragments, going about their task with an odd fatalism. Although the dialogue and cold, alien demeanor owes heavily to David Lynch, it is sure to please fans of the eclectic and bizarre like myself. The other plot strand, that of the dying boy's fever visions, is a bit heavy-handed in places, with an overkill of its clumsy angel motif, but it manages enough ambiguity and originality to avoid queasiness.

Above all else, this film has the feel of a strange dream, mired in drab shades and an undercurrent of ominous mystery. The camera work is brilliant and, despite awkward moments, the film has the feeling of a deep, cold water reservoir running beneath a landscape familiar and unreal at once.

When Northfork debuted at the Cannes Film Festival, many people didn't like it because they felt it was boring and too slow. While I agree that it was slow (one of the slowest movies of the year), in no way was it boring. As Roger Ebert said, `there has never been a movie like Northfork.' I usually don't agree with Ebert, but for once he speaks the truth. Although John Sayles' Sunshine State may have some of the same immediate themes, nothing that I have ever seen or known of can even compare to the striking originality of the Polish Brothers' Northfork.

Northfork is a perfect example of how many times it's better to trek an extra few minutes to go to an art-house film instead of the latest Jack Black movie. The plot isn't some hackneyed, cookie-cutter plot; it's just so strikingly original. A small town in Montana named Northfork has a dam nearby that is about to be taken down. Therefore, the entire town must be evacuated. Some people, however, just don't want to leave. In a side plot, a young orphan (Duel Farnes) is very sick and bedridden; he's being taken care of by Father Harlan (Nick Nolte). The boy imagines himself as a fallen angel, so to speak, who help him out through his time of sickness.

Although much of the movie is straightforward, some of it could give David Lynch a run for his money. There's odd weather patterns, a weird, wooden, huge dog thing, and symbolism that would make Fellini proud. It's not as overall confusing as a Lynch film, but it's still quite odd. That's what makes Northfork so great: it's so out of the ordinary and yet so simple and plausible.

Northfork has a magical feel to it: it's almost like you're watching something you're not quite sure what it is but you feel entranced by it. As I said earlier, I agreed with Ebert on how this movie is unlike any other. However, I disagree when he says that it is `not entertaining'. He goes on to say it's just `enthralling.' Perhaps he just thought he should give it good reviews because everyone else is, but in lieu of how slow it was, I still thought it was very entertaining, something many dramas now can't do.

Northfork may not be the quickest movie or the most popular movie, but if you can get to and through it, you'll be extremely surprised, as I was.

My rating: 8/10

Rated PG-13 for brief sexuality.

I enjoyed this film's surreal nature and mysteriousness of the characters. The cinematography is beautiful, and the film is well-cast. Although I usually do not like Nick Nolte and the roles he plays, he showed great depth in this film.

Viewers who are unaccustomed to abstract film-making will find the plot disturbingly confusing, but I thought the transcendent themes overode the ambiguuities. If you absolutely HAVE to "understand" the film, just listen to the director's comments on the DVD. Doing this, however, diminishes the abstract beauty of the film--the way an art expert can ruin the experience of a fascinating painting in a museum.

By an odd coincidence, I had toured the locale for this film only a few months before purchasing it, and I thought the director captured the awesome yet austere nature of western Montana well.

The film is worth seeing just for the scenery and cinematography alone, and it offers many interesting topics for sociological discussions. I have already recommended it to number of my friends who appreciate esoteric films.

Never having seen a Polish brothers movie, I approached this with no expectations.

Somewhere in Montana in 1952 (though everything suggests an earlier date and the cars, as usual, are too perfect looking), a plain is to be flooded by a dam and a team of men in black suits is sent out to coax the few recalcitrant remaining inhabitants to vacate the properties. Each pair of evacuators is supposed to be awarded one and a half acres of prime lakefront property if they can prove that 65 locations assigned to them have been vacated. One team is James Woods (as Walter O'Brian) and his son Willis (Mark Polish). They're also supposed to remove Wood's character's wife's coffin because graves are supposed to be dug up to prevent the coffins' floating up in the flooded land. Needless to say, this makes little literal sense: the references here are to the American frontier mentality, to imperialism, land grabbing, materialism, and impiety, which the Polish brothers are impressionistically dealing with throughout this strange and highly allegorical film.

Meanwhile Nick Nolte is Father Harlan, a deranged priest running a decrepit orphanage to which a fleeing couple return a small boy they adopted earlier (Duel Farnes, who is fine) because, they say, he was `defective,' being sick all along, and is now too sick to travel.

Much of what follows revolves around the boy and may constitute his dying delirium or fantasy that he is an angel. He meets Daryl Hannah (Flower Hercules) in a graveyard in a wig and Elizabethan costume and goes back with her to see her pals, Cup of Tea (Robin Sachs, also in Elizabethan drag), Happy (Anthony Edwards, with a bizarre complex of adjustable spectacles on), and Cod (Ben Foster, a wordless young man in a bejeweled cowboy hat), and begs them to take him away from this place with them – 1,000 miles away, he insists. They bargain over the distance: this may constitute the denial and bargaining of the dying person.

At its center the film cuts back and forth with lugubrious regularity between this scene, in which the boy tries to claim he has scars from where he used to have wigs and a halo (Cup of Tea is unconvinced, Hannah is weepily sympathetic, Happy is scientifically neutral, and Cod is mute) – and scenes focused either exclusively on the band of evacuators or, as the film progresses, on them in encounters, variously hostile, fearful, or unfriendly, between them and the stubborn or oblivious holdouts on the land. One team is shot at, their car nearly demolished. Woods and son deal with a man with two wives who's built an ark. They fail to convince all three to leave, and, having evidence of only 64 evacuations, receive no land document.

Nick Nolte all the while is seen trying to save the boy, whom at one point he offers to Kyle McLaughlin and wife (Mr. and Mrs. Hope: this begins to sound like Pilgrim's Progress), but they aren't allowed to view the boy up close, only through a window, so they leave empty-handed (Hope without Faith thus disappointed). Nolte, Father Harlan, also goes to a pharmacist and gets antibiotics which he injects in the boy; he bathes him, reads to him, etc., but all efforts fail and the boy dies, apparently. Meanwhile scenes of the boy with Daryl Hannah et al. continue. In the end they all fly away in a big plane just like the little one in the boy's lap. Cod is his co-pilot.

Much is made of a set of putative `angel's wings,' big snowy white bird's wings which inexplicably are carried around in a large suitcase and shown both to the man with two wives and to Hannah and company.

Though no doubt enormously puzzling and open to many interpretations, it must be said that compared to something like Alejandro Joderovsky's El Topo, which this inexplicably reminded me of, Northfork makes much coherent narrative sense. Somehow the apocalyptic mood and the presence of dubious priests, spectral landscapes, and semi-mythological characters also bring Cormac McCarthy to mind, but the movie lacks McCarthy's vivid regional character and colloquial down home talk.

What it all means is more than I can venture to say in any more detail here. The tedium of the pacing might be more unfortunate if it were not to some extent relieved by an omnipresent sense of humor and also by a loyal and able cast and a stunning cinematography that combines colorless dimness with exquisite clarity in ways that heighten the pervasive sense of the surreal.

There is no doubt at all that the Polish brothers are originals. If hip young people and art film cultists like this film as much as Roger Ebert (who inexplicably believes the loquacious and visually acute Happy to be both blind and mute), Northfork will be on some level a stunning success. To many it is likely to remain arid and incomprehensible . . .and not sexy and scary like David Lynch. But the vision is unique -- and not as incomprehensible as it may seem.