I liked the first film of this trilogy, but this second one is making me wonder whether it will be worthwhile to watch the third.
Its obvious that Kieslowski is trying somehow to speak of the eternal issues, love, death, wealth, poverty, loyalty, betrayal... unfortunately it just doesn't work.
(Spoiler warning: don't read further if you don't want to know anything about what happens in this film)
We have here an impotant husband in love with a beautiful wife, who says she needs him desperately but divorces him and frames him for arson.
The despondent husband becomes a homeless street dweller, trying to get some money for food by playing a homemade comb and waxpaper kazoo.
He randomly meets someone who helps him get back to Poland, at which point, through a set of very unlikely circumstances he quickly becomes super-rich.
Then he stages his own death to get his wife back, and when she has proved she really does love him, he frames her for the murder (also in a very unbelievable way).
In the end, it appears that they'll be together again as soon as she can escape from jail, which, given the unlikely circumstances of the rest of the movie, seems a foregone conclusion.
Does any of this make sense or mean anything? Perhaps to some, but not to me. If this had been a Hollywood movie, made using a commercial esthetic, it would have been lambasted by critics for its silly plot and nonsensical characterizations. Instead, it's an "art" film, and somehow this makes all the silliness seem profound.
Don't be fooled. This movie just doesn't work.
Its obvious that Kieslowski is trying somehow to speak of the eternal issues, love, death, wealth, poverty, loyalty, betrayal... unfortunately it just doesn't work.
(Spoiler warning: don't read further if you don't want to know anything about what happens in this film)
We have here an impotant husband in love with a beautiful wife, who says she needs him desperately but divorces him and frames him for arson.
The despondent husband becomes a homeless street dweller, trying to get some money for food by playing a homemade comb and waxpaper kazoo.
He randomly meets someone who helps him get back to Poland, at which point, through a set of very unlikely circumstances he quickly becomes super-rich.
Then he stages his own death to get his wife back, and when she has proved she really does love him, he frames her for the murder (also in a very unbelievable way).
In the end, it appears that they'll be together again as soon as she can escape from jail, which, given the unlikely circumstances of the rest of the movie, seems a foregone conclusion.
Does any of this make sense or mean anything? Perhaps to some, but not to me. If this had been a Hollywood movie, made using a commercial esthetic, it would have been lambasted by critics for its silly plot and nonsensical characterizations. Instead, it's an "art" film, and somehow this makes all the silliness seem profound.
Don't be fooled. This movie just doesn't work.