“Think of this as time travel…”

 

In Richard Linklater’s 1995 film Before Sunrise, Jesse, an idealist young American travelling through Europe, tries to persuade Celine, a French woman he has just met, to spend the day with him in Vienna. Crucial to his line of reasoning is the idea of regret: what if they let this moment go and spend the rest of their lives wondering “what if?”  So Jesse asks Celine to imagine a point in the future, ten or twenty years down the line, when life is no longer filled with the promise of youth:  “Think of this as time travel”, he tells her, “from then till now.” What might this potentially life-changing encounter, this interruption of the quotidian, mean to them as they approached middle age? It’s a good question, and one that Linklater and his actors, Julie Delpy and Ethan Hawke, have attempted to answer on two further occasions: Before Sunset picked up Celine and Jesse’s story nine years later, while the third film in the series, Before Midnight, is scheduled for release in June of this year.  Jesse’s remark—“Think of this as time travel”— now takes on an even deeper resonance—and not only for the film’s protagonists.

Not that we could have known—my wife and I—that a film we watched on a Saturday night, in April, 1995, would end up serving as a marker in our own lives.  How could we?  Back then, we were still ten years off being married. Not only that, but I doubt the filmmakers themselves had at that point conceived of returning to their fictional creations. Besides, Before Sunrise was not the kind of film that spawned sequels, and certainly not in the mid- 1990s: studio-backed but “personal” and “independent”; episodic rather than plot-driven; and with long, languorous takes—it lived out of a backpack, as it were. But from the start it had the one special effect intrinsic to cinema itself: the concept of time.  Which makes it make it sound “heavy” for a Saturday night at the movies, though it was anything but.

In those (pre-congestion zone) days, we thought nothing of driving into the West End to see a movie.  And on the following Monday morning, when I returned to my job as a video buyer for HMV…Well, there you go: perhaps you can see what I’m getting at: video, HMV—how much has already gone to the wall. Or as Celine tells Jesse (in Before Sunset): “It’s about that moment in time that’s forever gone.”

Of course, it was only with the arrival of the second film that Linklater revealed the hand that had been there all along.  It took Before Sunset for me to see it. The actors had noticeably aged, especially Hawke, who looked as though the interim years had not been kind: the boyishness was gone, and when Jesse spoke of a marriage failing one felt that Hawke was speaking from experience. (Hawke is a co-writer on the film, along with Delpy and Linklater.) The euphoria and sense of possibility that the first film engendered had been replaced by a feeling of disappointment that is positively Chekhovian in its lament for lost time and unrealized dreams.

By the time Before Sunset came out (2004), I was working in cinema exhibition—cinema management, film programming and projection—and on at least three occasions screened the films in a double-bill.  So I could see how each film deepened and enriched the other. But even to write these words is to realize how much has changed in such a short span of time. The idea of a double-bill is almost a thing of the past.  Since the release of Before Sunset, the cinema I manage has undergone both a name-change and, like many cinemas, its own technological revolution: films nowadays are rarely screened on 35mm prints.  When Before Midnight is finally released in June, it will almost certainly be digitally projected, with reels replaced by a DCP (digital content package). And where is the romance—the loveliness—in that?  But that is where we are: things change, losses accrue. We go on.

In 2005 my wife moved to New York (for work), while I remained in London, which seemed—on the surface, anyway—a Jesse and Celine type predicament.  In reality, it meant I made numerous trips to New York, eventually moving there in the summer of 2007.  When I wasn’t applying for jobs I spent a year walking the streets, exploring the canyon avenues.  I went to the movies, subscribed to American magazines, looked after our old cat, and enjoyed a different kind of existence.  A friend asked if I was “re-inventing myself”.  I told him no, but I knew what he meant: I was exploring the “what if” of my own life.

And then in May 2008, as my year in New York was coming to its visa-imposed end, I stepped out of a bookshop in Chelsea and recognised a man in his late thirties, walking up 10th Avenue, his son beside him.  It was Ethan Hawke, or Jesse if you are given to speculating about fictional characters. He looked well, which made me think that Celine was back in his life.  At that point, I had no idea if another film was in the works; there were only rumours of a reunion. But here we are in 2013 and I’m not sure what to expect.

—MM

Before Midnight (2013) Ethan Hawk Juli Delpy

GETTING PERSONAL

What is a “personal film”?  Is it simply a question of autobiography, a branch of life writing? Or do these so-called personal works transcend autobiography by using the tricks of fiction as a way to obscure—or enhance—the personal nature of the work?  And in the end, does it matter?  All artists draw from their lives, searching for ways to make sense of their experience: life becomes redeemed—and transformed—by art.    For certain types of artist—the confessional poet and the personal essayist, say—the task is unambiguous, though not without ambivalence: the poet and the essayist are at the centre of their work.  They know it, and so does the reader, even though the poet and the essayist might employ sleight of hand as much as any creator of fiction. But what about the “personal filmmaker”, who at the outset almost has to claim her vision as “personal”, as if this declaration in itself was a way of vouching for the legitimacy of their work: it’s personal, therefore it must be true.  While those filmmakers that do not announce the personal nature of their films—Stanley Kubrick’s Eyes Wide Shut, Terrence Malick’s The Tree of Life—are subjected to intense speculation anyway, because of their reticence: what are they hiding?

Unlike the poet and the essayist the personal filmmaker rarely works alone. Financial and technical concerns affect aesthetics.  Casting choices simultaneously enhance and obscure first-person strategies.  So how does the work remain “personal” when so many people, and so many factors, are involved? And how does a critic write about “personal films” knowing that a moment they single out might be “the flash-bomb vitality that one scene, actor, or technician injects across the grain of film” (Manny Farber)?

Getting Personal, a virtual season, sets out to cover the terrain of the “personal film” as practiced by a new generation of filmmakers—Noah Baumbach (The Squid and the Whale), Lena Dunham (Creative Non-fiction, Tiny Furniture, Girls); Mia Hansen-Love (Goodbye, First Love) and Joanna Hogg (Unrelated, Archipelago)—while drawing on the work of the “personal film’s” progenitors: Woody Allen’s “novels on film”, John Cassavetes’ psychodramas, and the essay-films of Chris Petit and Agnes Varda. It examines the way literature—particularly the essay—continues to influence movies, though not necessarily because of screen adaptations of books.  It asks the questions: why are these filmmakers flourishing now?  And what does our appetite for—and response to—works of a personal nature say about us?

—MM

Archipelago

Before I Forget

Content

Distant Voices, Still Lives

Goodbye First Love

Husbands and Wives

Jacquot de Nantes

Keep the Lights On

My Winnipeg

Something in the Air

The Squid and the Whale

Synecdoche, New York

Tiny Furniture

The Tree of Life

Unrelated

Weekend