Roman Polanski

[Jean]

Today I am posting my review of The Ninth Gate, the only Polanski film to date that may be called cosy and relaxing to watch – in spite of its apparently dark themes and essentially disturbing meaning. I have such a lot to say, and my mind is running to such a lot of directions, that I had to limit myself harshly. Thus, for once, in this first post about the movie I’ll give the floor to other people who have commented on it during the years.

From a certain point of view, there’s a lot of common between TNG and The Ghost Writer: both movies are way too subtle for their own good, neither satisfies those who expected a genre movie (a political or mystical thriller), and, needless to say, like all Polanski movies, both make an inexhaustible watch, and are examples of flawless filmmaking, - but these two really split the audience into two unequal parts, the minority wondering I the majority actually watched the same film. Both films are perfect targets for misunderstanding, gracefully misleading people into believing that there’s nothing more to them than meets the eye.

I recently saw an imdb member’s signature which read: “Movies are IQ tests. The IMDB boards are each person's opportunity to broadcast their score”.(imdb signature: kimrose111). It explains the rage TNG inspires. Here’s a perfect example:

Suspense? Action Packed? Thriller? Exciting? Reading some of the other peoples reviews, I wonder if we saw the same movie. The movie I saw was over 2 hours of some guy studying books. I've never heard the phrase "that's quite a book collection you have there" in one movie. This movie showed promise for about the first five minutes. Good opening credits and good character introduction. Then after about a half an hour, I realized this entire movie was about studying books. How exciting! Nothing like watching a thrilling "rare book collector" study books and smoke for 2 hours. This movie would have been good if it didn't have any books in it. It should have started from the last 15 minutes and have been an adventure through the pits of hell. If you're a 100 year old librarian, go see it!! This movie packs lots of book studying action!

The really interesting thing is that the simple-minded author of the above only said in simple words what most high-brow critics at Rotten Tomatoes (where the film holds a stunningly low rating) said in big complex sentences.

The happier I am reading what the minority has to say, and today I just want to let them speak for me:

After watching this brilliant masterpiece I came to the conclusion that Roman Polanski is one of the best directors in the history of the cinema.

The Ninth Gate is a great film and one of Roman Polanski's most underrated films. Twenty years from now people will give this film the respect it deserves and hail it to be the great film that it is.
Now, I think I have watched it maybe 7 or 8 times, and it keeps getting better and better. This film is really has a life of it's on, and a life filled with passion, that is.
Ninth Gate is a masterpiece and it moves with weightless virtuosity. Polanski has contributed so many brilliant, quirky, unusual, visionesque, funny things. It was exhilarating to watch this graceful, lovely, stylish, mature bit of movie-making. Some of his earlier work has higher highs and lower lows, but this time he's come up with something so balanced in every respect that it seems close to perfect. It's fascinating to watch...the casting, storyline, editing, score, lighting, subtle use of effects...in fact, even his composition in the opening credits is interesting.
Every detail is so carefully placed and so well integrated. Having been inspired by it to read the book it's based on, I can say that he has also accomplished that rare feat of improving the book's story line. Ninth Gate never wastes time. Every moment is calculated and has a reason.

Ignore the negative reviews and comments from people who've been brainwashed and blinded by the current Hollywood fast-food style of film making with the intention of only appealing to the lowest common denominator. A review doesn't make a good film better or a bad film worse. A superb film. Rating 10 out of 10.

A tragically under-appreciated work of art

And finally, this:

If you rent or purchase the DVD, in some cases it comes with a separate disk, where Polanski gives a brief analysis of almost every scene in the movie as they play. This is one case where the extra disc that comes with a movie may be at least as fascinating as the movie itself. Listening to him, and thinking about his work, drives home again the cloddish stupidity, bloated grandiosity posing as power, and utter lack of vision and artistry in almost everything produced today.
Hearing his voice on this discussion, the way he phrases, his accent, his interesting sense of humor, the way he compresses his considerable intellect for this quite sophisticated but casual chat with the viewer,(and you are not short shrifted here....he speaks for over an hour....the conversational tone simply has class) was like listening to an old friend I hadn't seen in a long time. He has a towering gift for film but expresses himself in such a funny canny unassuming way. A genuine and original artist and a terrific movie.

In my post below, the quotes from the director’s comment will be highlighted in blue, like this one, with which I want to finish this introduction:

“I know that some directors are very careful about the choice of subject so it all will look good in the curriculum vitae, but I am personally not very much interested in it. I am much more concerned with the excitement and thrill which working on a particular movie can bring me than where it would be placed in my biography. I make movies that I would like to see on the screen. I am catering to my own desires.”

[Jean]

1. The World

The world as represented in The Ninth Gate is diametrically opposite of the absurd, disjointed world of Cul-de-Sac, and radically different from that of The Tenant.

The former is obvious. The godless universe of Cul-de-Sac was the epitome of the absurd (we talked about it here), while in the universe of The Ninth Gate, explicitly governed, guided and shaped by superior forces, everything is interconnected. We might say that this reality is a reality as magical (meaning that magic involves inherent interconnection between all entities) as that of The Tenant, but the nature of the magic is different. The Tenant showed us the irrational, insane magic of a mad world; the universe of The Ninth Gate is rationally magical. It is clear and transparent, such as a magical reality should show to an enlightened mind. And Corso, the enlightened mind (unlike the troubled mind, Trelkovski) feels totally at ease in this geometrical structure.

In this world, everything is a symbol, and every symbol yields to interpretation. Coincidence is excluded. The Girl appears at a lecture on demons and medieval literature, and camera looks at her exactly at the moment when Balkan, the lecturer, gives a definition of “witch”. The faces in the three-century-old engravings are those of the characters. The codes Balkan punches on the keypads are, invariably, 666. The femme fatale smokes Black Devils. The camera repeatedly fixes on Shell Oil Logo (symbol of Aphrodite, who is associated with The Whore of Babylon and, via her other symbol - the Morning Star - with Lucifer himself). In France, Corso drives a Chrysler Dodge Viper (viper is already significant enough, plus Chrysler logo is a pentagram; the color – red – also matters). Before the end, Corso hikes a ride in a truck with sheep (his antiXmas). The postcard of the Devil’s Tower has The Girl’s photo as a stamp.There are scores of those, scattered all over the movie, but I think I’ve discovered the following one myself (I don’t remember ever seeing anyone mentioning it): the picture in Corso’s hotel room in Paris is an old engraving of Porte St.Martin (St.Martin being the maiden name of Lianna Telfer, and the castle where the devil worship takes place), I think this:



And a rather esoteric moment: in the line to check-in Corso looks for The Girl who had just been there, but can’t see her; he turns around and there’s a little girl staring at him. Well, The Girl is Emmanuelle Seigner, and the little girl is Morgane Seigner-Polanski.

This world, composed of symbols, hints, leads and cues, is also composed of quotations. The Ninth Gate stands alone in Polanski’s heritage to date as his only apparently “post-modern” film. The film lampoons many a cliché, and eventually the post-modern approach itself. Corso is “chain-smoking and drinking whiskey, like Philip Marlow or Sam Spade”, the fatal woman is the fatalest possible, the whole Corso/Lianna lovemaking scene comes, it would seem, directly from Hollywood, as well as the comeback (“Don’t you fuck with me!” – “I thought I already did”). Simultaneously, the clichés are mocked, turned inside out, even in this very scene: the femme fatale has to unleash her wrath on a man whose pants are around his ankles. Then, true to genre again, the scene “ends, as it often ends in these books, by the detective being hit on the head”. After the pants-down dancing scene, it can hardly be taken seriously. “There are a great number of clichés of this type in The Ninth Gate, which I tried to turn around a bit. You can make them appear serious on the surface, but you cannot help but laugh at them”.

Also, in this film Polanski is continuingly quoting himself - both his past and, paradoxically, future films.

The film is about a book, like The Ghost Writer and, like in The Ghost Writer, the precious book is shaken ash upon, carried about in a piece of rag, hidden in all kinds of inappropriate places. Like the Young Man (Knife in the Water) or the Ghost, the Girl has no name. Like Rosemary, Tess, Dr.Walker, Alfred or anyone who is about to lose their life or soul, or undergo a significant metaphysical change, Corso changes his outfit: in the middle of the film, the eyeglasses (after being anointed by the devil girl), and in the very end he enters the light without his overcoat and shoulder bag he never parted with throughout the film. Corso has to walk barefoot like Dr.Walker, to have his face ridiculously altered like Gittes. Hanging himself, Telfer loses his slippers (compare Frantic or The Tenant). A Chinese gardener is raking leaves when Corso leaves Lianna’s house, which means danger in Chinatown and The Ghost Writer as well. Like Rosemary, Corso talks over the phone with an unseen interlocutor (“I like scenes in phone booths”; why of course, it’s cinema in its purest). A drop of blood slowly comes down Corso’s forehead towards his eyes (“…on cue, and being discreet enough and yet noticeable. I didn’t want any ketchup splashing over his glasses, I just wanted one drop to slowly go down”), like in Death and the Maiden.

So, in this world, “trying to mix irony with macabre (some don’t get it, it’s a gamble)”, so Polanski and at the same essentially so different, due to its outwardly pastiche character, from the world he has created in his other films, will we see the old themes again? Or is the main character now a winner, and evil suddenly attractive?

2. The Light

“Devil is a good protagonist for films <…> I am not a believer myself, and I can’t talk about devil without humor, or irony, but he is a good guy to make a film about.”

I’ll assume that my readers agree that the Girl is the devil (whether himself, or his associate and messenger, is immaterial), so I don’t have to prove this obvious point.

It is, of course, a very non-conventional devil, in mismatched socks and very simple clothes. She reads How to Win Friends and Influence People; self-help books are, as we already know from Rosemary’s Baby, the devil’s favorite tool. She treats the devil worshippers with cool, weary contempt: such a lot of effort to summon her, and she is right here.

Nobody seems to ever see her, though, unless she wants to appear to them. She seems to be unnoticed, unquestioned anywhere she goes in her jeans, trainers and overcoat. It takes Corso a few attempts to really see her: first time he hardly registers her presence before falling asleep, second time he only catches a sudden glimpse through the gap in books, third time she is all blurred, and when he puts on his glasses, she’s gone. And he never sees her flying.

She guides and protects him. She anoints him with blood. She saves his life. She fucks him. She leads him to the light. And she is attractive.

The others, the pathetic devil worshippers, are not. They are ridiculous in their robes (note the bourgeois face in expensive eyeglasses on the foreground), especially when Balkan appears among them in a suit. Their fleeing from him is hilarious (don’t miss the one who, already in the yard, is rapidly pulling on his pants). Like in Rosemary’s Baby, they are not fascinating or awe-inspiring, or mysterious; unlike in Rosemary’s Baby, they are not even scary. They are silly and, in the big scheme of things, quite nonexistent. Balkan himself, the ultimate loser of this game, has more substance, but zero fascination. He is a typical “bad guy”, and it’s nice to see, for once, the downfall of one.

The Girl, however, is an entirely different kettle of fish.

It’s how devil will appear to those who don’t believe in him, who don’t believe in anything. To those who do not seek vulgar things like money or power. To the agnostic souls, empty of values, who only seek knowledge and enlightment.

Well, they’ll have their knowledge and enlightment and the blood ritual will be performed. Corso, glasses broken, forehead blood-smeared, talks on the phone in the hotel lobby and looks at himself in a brass plate on the wall: he recognizes his new self. Ceniza twins, the gatekeepers, whose face is that of the Cherub guarding the bridge, in their timeless, suspended corner of the universe where the same boy yells “Si, mama!” regardless of the shape the Ash brothers take this time, will provide the final key.

Balkan aspired to the carnal, the sinful, the vulgar (the idea that the devil can be summoned by an incantation is utterly vulgar, it comes from magic and directly contradicts Christian concepts), he goes down in flames. Corso goes up the spiritual ladder, and the eternal light greets him, the enlightened one. After all, who is Lucifer but Light-Bearer: his light shines eternal. That’s where Corso goes in the end.

It takes more than intellect to separate the light of Lucifer from the true light of God.

“Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.” (Isaiah 5:20)

In all other Polanski films, we were never faced with a necessity to separate them, to make our choice – it was done for us, because we only saw the evil with the eyes of the victim, with his or her living, suffering, tortured humanity.

Here, for the first (and the last to date) time we see the main character who is apparently a winner, not a loser; a predator, not a prey. Oh good Lord… if you’re the victim, you go down. Otherwise, you lose your soul.

“And if the light you think you have is actually darkness, how deep that darkness is!” (Mat 6:22)

3. The Man

So, why does the devil choose Corso? Surely there are people far more depraved, vicious, those who seem like they should be Satan’s chosen ones? Balkan would seem the right guy for the devil. Looking at him, we feel that there’s no deadly sin (well, except sloth) he hasn’t committed due to his obsession and his obviously passionate nature.

Moreover, he does commit a few before our very eyes, and in his satanic pride, is proud of them. And here, I believe, lies the crucial point. He deceives and murders for the devil. He believes devil must recognize his own. Thus, doing what he does, he knows it is bad.

Back to Corso, now, whose is an entirely different soul.

All his qualities, good or bad, can be defined by negatives. He is pitiless, unscrupulous, impassionate, altogether not giving a fuck. The only positive definition I can come up with is “cynical”, which implies the absence of values rather than the presence of anything. (See how he yawns at exactly the right moment: when accused of stabbing friends in the back.)

He is above deadly sins. Wrath? Too cool and detached. Sloth? Obviously hard-working. Lust? Nothing out of the ordinary. Gluttony? Hard to imaging him gorging himself. Envy? What and whom would he envy?

Greed? A mercenary by trade, he ought to love money; given his professional reputation, he ought to have made quite a lot; but look at his apartment. No luxury there, except for the priceless volumes on the shelves. For dinner he microwaves frozen pizza. Remember his shabby clothes, his shoulder bag, his cheap plastic lighter, and the Luckies he smokes, always in the soft pack so they are bent when he takes them out of his pocket (compare to the gold case Lianna carries her Black Devils in, and her lighter). No, it has never been about money, or anything money could buy, although he explicitly says a few times that it is.

What was it about, then?

Pride? Mother of all sins, this is the only one that doesn’t necessary imply passion. Here we might be hitting on something. I would say that he mercilessly hunts for money because it’s the integral part of the profession he chose, and he wants to be the best in his chosen field: otherwise, what would be the point of working there at all. But if it is at all objectionable, it’s only because of the nature of the field; in itself, it’s a laudable quality. There’s something preventing us accusing of pride those who want to be the best in whatever they do; and there’s something else that totally prevents me suspecting Corso of being a sinner of any kind.

Committing a sin, as opposed to committing a crime, involves knowing that you’re sinning, involves accepting the concept of sin. Corso is as sinless as a newborn baby.

He is, in fact, one step beyond Rosemary; he starts where she left off. She went through the motions of abandoning God and filling the emptiness inside with instant modern values; he is quite comfortable with the emptiness (there apparently was no faith there to begin with). I said in my Rosemary’s Baby analysis that I believe she will belong to the sect body and soul, but we never see her make this step. We see Corso, though.

In a word, the difference between Balkan and Corso is that between immorality and amorality. Immorality negates morality, while amorality isn’t even aware of its existence. Corso’s is a postmodern soul, where all values are of equal value[lessness]: there’s no hierarchy.

Hence the ostensibly post-modern form of the film itself: no mistake should be made about its purpose.

Technically, this approach allowed the director to show the supernatural without ambiguity (unlike what he did Rosemary’s Baby), because “the whole film is not very serious… I wouldn’t say parody, but it makes fun of detective genre and supernatural genre”. Substantially, the form fits the essence of the main character.

You can’t commit a sacrilege if you have no concept of the sacred. You can’t commit a sinful act of moral transgression if both the concepts of sin and moral are foreign to you. Balkan can do all this; Balkan can overthrow his values because he had an idea of values to begin with. Where there are no icons, there’s no iconoclasm. To kill a thing, you must admit it exists. To refuse God, you must believe in Him. To go beyond limits, you must be aware of there being limits. To negate, you must first uphold. Balkan does; Corso doesn’t.

I won’t analyse this little gem, but those who’ve seen the film will know what I mean:
Balkan: Correctly interpreted with the aid of the original text and sufficient inside information, they're reputed to conjure up the Prince of Darkness in person.
Corso: You don't say.

“Well, Mr.Corso,” approves the Girl when Corso beats Pablo to death, “I didn’t know you had it in you.” It’s a bonus, but not a prerequisite. She didn’t know he had it in him, but he fit the requirements anyway. He doesn’t have to commit any sins, his axiological blankness will do. A positivist who only believes what he sees, an enlightened soul with no hierarchy of values - this is the devil’s chosen one.

“Being what thou art, lukewarm, neither cold nor hot, thou wilt make me vomit thee out of my mouth.”( Apocalypse 3:16)

[Heather19]

Great analysis Jean. The Ninth Gate is one of my favorite Polanski films, and I too think it's highly underrated. I'm going to have to pay particular attention to all the symbols you've mentioned when I rewatch it. I'm sure I didn't catch them all. And I'm going to look for that dvd that includes Polanski discussing the film. That would be really interesting to watch.

[Jean]

thank you love!
I too wish more people would watch and appreciate this exceptional movie.

***
Here's an interesting event going on: http://seetimaar.wordpress.com/2013/...-18-sep-22013/
I am one of the participants, of course, and there are quite interesting and insightful reviews there (besides mine, that is)

[Heather19]

Excellent, I'll check it out. I was just reading on there that he adapted Tess of D’Ubervilles? Have you seen it, and is it worth watching?

[Jean]

yes to both! (don't ask a bear if a Polanski film is worth watching...)

also, there is a big documental on the making of Tess, and he writes a lot about it in his memoir, it's amazing

I am surprized that you didn't see it, it's an absolute must for any cinema lover. I will review it some time, love it immensely.

[Heather19]

I should have guessed. Have you seen every Polanski film, or is there an obscure one or two you haven't seen?

[Jean]

have seen them all, including the court-metrages he made in the movie school, and all the films where he played, including the old black-and-white in Polish, not only where he had leading parts, like Koniec Nocy, but also those where he appears for a moment; let alone all the documentals, interviews and any other footage I could get. Yes, the bear is a monomaniac.

His only film I haven't seen so far is La Vénus à la fourrure, because it isn't available yet.

[DoctorDodge]

Just watched the Ninth Gate, will finally read your analysis Jean in a short while.

[Jean]

awesome!! bears want to hear your thoughts!

[Heather19]

And Heathers are eagerly waiting to hear if you loved it or not.

[Heather19]

Jean, I'm assuming you've seen Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired. How was it, and is it worth a watch? I was curious if it gave a lot of insight into the case.

[Jean]

Unfortunately, they leave out such a lot of important documents that it devaluates their effort. I suggest you reading the analysis of the documents first (link in my signature), and then see the film as an illustration.

[Heather19]

Ah ok, thanks. Maybe I'll just skip it then. I've been meaning to read your blog. I've read bits and pieces but not the whole thing yet.

[Jean]

[mae]

The Films of Roman Polanski, Ranked Worst to Best: http://www.indiewire.com/article/ran...-worst-to-best

[Jean]

thank you pablo! LOL, it's a funny list, but very expected. The two Hollywood films are ranked "the best", the indie masterpieces - the worst (even though the site calls itself indiewire) and Repulsion, made with the only purpose to raise money for Cul-de-Sac, but acclaimed by critics, is the third best. Soooooo unlike my own rating! The only good thing about the list is that they, unexpectedly, placed McBeth near the top.

[Randall Flagg]

I hate to be a buzz killer, but Polanski needs to return to the USA and serve his time for the self-admitted rape of a 13 year-old.

[CyberGhostface]

I hate to be a buzz killer, but Polanski needs to return to the USA and serve his time for the self-admitted rape of a 13 year-old.

IKR? And I can't with people who go "She looks/acts older". Thirteen is thirteen. Even if it was 'consensual' (which it wasn't), she's still thirteen. She had sex before? Still thirteen. Ugh.

[Jean]

I hate to be a buzz killer, but Polanski needs to return to the USA and serve his time for the self-admitted rape of a 13 year-old.

I hate to be a buzz killer, but Polanski needs to return to the USA and serve his time for the self-admitted rape of a 13 year-old.

IKR? And I can't with people who go "She looks/acts older". Thirteen is thirteen. Even if it was 'consensual' (which it wasn't), she's still thirteen. She had sex before? Still thirteen. Ugh.

This thread has been here for years by now, and the moderators of this section (Gem Theater) decided it would be reserved for cinema discussion. We all agreed to keep this casa out of this forum.

I have been studying the '77 case for 4 years. If you want to get acquainted with my arguments and the documents, the link is in my signature. I realize that you never saw the documents.

I don't think here is the right place for me to repeat all I said in my research. For example, if I remind you that this "thirteen" admitted to have had "wonderful sex" (her own words) with other men (none of whom was ever reported by her family) at the same time, or quote the official conclusion, namely, that "He is not a pedophile… The offense occurred as an isolated instance of transient poor judgment… The provocative circumstances, permissiveness and knowledge of circumstances by mother, physical maturity and willingness and provocativeness of victim, and the lack of coercion by defendant… all contribute to the above impression…", or remind you that he has already done the agreed-upon time - twice! - it would be only a beginning of a long and useless discussion about isolated points. I analyzed all the existing documents on my blog with this main purpose in mind: to keep Gem Theater here clear of this drama.

So, you are all very welcome to see my research here.

[CyberGhostface]

physical maturity and willingness and provocativeness of victim

She's. Thirteen.

[Jean]

physical maturity and willingness and provocativeness of victim

She's. Thirteen.

do you absolutely want to involve me into this discussion here? OK, yes, she was thirteen (she wasn't, but I can't go into it now). She was banging the whole neighborhood, I am sorry to say this, but it's in her memoirs. It's not me who said "physical maturity and willingness" - it's the probation officers after the investigation. Her medical examination calls her "adult female".

You may believe all you want that it's something extraordinary for girls that age to be sexually active, but it is not. Her own mother got pregnant at 13 (14 at the latest, I don't know the month). The age of consent in Europe started at 12 at that time (Italy) was 13 (and still is) in Spain (also Japan - still is), and 14 (still is) in most other countries. In the very US of A it was 14 in the State of Georgia at that time; so Geimer was only three weeks and a few state borders away from being able to legally have sex (though even that isn't true. She was not 13. She was 14 and a half, but it's a story for another day - see my research). She herself keeps speaking in her book of how good sex was, and how nobody at the time considered it dirty.

Yes, some girls mature earlier. Yes, some girls have "wonderful sex" before the time you consider it appropriate. Juliet, for God's sake, was thirteen.

didn't want to pollute this thread with her photos, but here you are:

Spoiler:

[CyberGhostface]

She looks like a child to me.



Also whether or not it's normal for 13 year olds to have sex, it's not normal for 43 year olds to have sex with them after drugging them. That's just disgusting. Polanski isn't the victim here. By his own admission, she is.

[Jean]

Cyber, you are sadly misinformed. Even the photo you posted doesn't belong to the same time, or to the case, it's from the family archive, taken long before.

No, he didn't "drug" her. No, he didn't "rape" her.

The conclusion I quoted is official, made after the investigation.

I have been through tons of documents. All those years. While you have only read what was in the media. And they have been lying to you. And I know how, and I know why, and I have analyzed the mechanism of their manipulation.

But you didn't even read what I posted here right now for you. Let alone my long and detailed research.

Do what you will, guys. You don't care a damn for the facts. You don't care a fuck for the documents. You don't want my arguments. You only want to assert your self-righteousness. You repeat the same old lies that have been refuted by the documents, and you will repeat them indefinitely, without listening to me. I've been through this before. I've had enough of ignorance and hypocrisy.

[Jean]

By the way, I've just made a stupid mistake.

I started answering what was officially declared to be off-topic.

From now on I will not respond to any more slanderous or misinformed remarks. I have said everything here. My research is open to comments and discussion. Everyone is welcome.