Down to arth
Has it ever happened to you that someone recommends you a song that they are tripping on but you dislike it after giving it a shot? Of course. Happens to everyone. It’s pretty common. What’s not-so-common is people giving that song another shot. Most of the time, it doesn’t get a second chance and the two are stranger to each other for eternity. But sometimes, you give it a listen and it grows on you to the stage that you start recommending it to others. Whether they like it at first go or whether they dismiss it completely or whether they get married to it so as to live happily ever after is a matter of probability.
This was music.
Cinema is a slightly different roulette.
You watch a movie and you like it? Fine. You watch a movie and you dislike it? Well. You watch a movie and you like it so you watch it again and again? Awesome. You watch a movie and you dislike it but you watch it again because you feel maybe the problem is with you instead of the movie? Whoa! That’s rare. Mostly, we tend to deduce that a disliked movie was terrible and this verdict has nothing to do with the state of mind we were in while watching it. We are too sorted to cloud our mind as far as cinema is concerned, right? Pffft. Technically, when you watch a disliked movie again, you are not only giving it a second chance but also yourself. Believe it or not, your judgment can have a bad day too.
I know this because i have a habit of revisiting movies that disappointed me. Movies that were supposed to be great but ended up short on my expectations. The kind that my friends still rave about but i refuse to join the march. Until i do, that is. I was talking to my fellow cinephile buddy from Bombay this week and we were discussing the impact 9/11 had on the world in general and filmmaking in particular. How onscreen stories started dredging towards real stories (read: biopics) whereas the fear of motion capture looms at the other end of the spectrum. Etc. During this conversation, we talked about the films that did justice to 9/11; the ones who managed to humanize the event. According to me, United 93 (2006) was the finest contender in this category while he thought it was Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close (2011).
What?
I’d seen Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close in 5–6 years ago and i found it extremely annoying. I remember telling a fellow journalist back then that the only reason this film got an Best Picture Oscar nomination is because of the sentimental value attached to terror victims. My reasons weren’t opaque: I didn’t like the boy in the film to begin with. He was getting on my nerves repeatedly. Instead of being endearing, he was pretty much a Grade A asshole. I also found the story unnecessarily dragged for no measure. All in all, i disliked the film although it starred Tom Hanks, in a cameo-ish role nonetheless, and i thought i was done with it.
This was before i watched it again yesterday after coming back home from office.
I have a different view now. Not only is this movie brilliant but it also merits credit for handling a sensitive topic respectfully. At first, you’d assume that it’s a typical Jewish-from-NYC storyline. It’s not. It has an American soul. Close to 3000 people perished in World Trade Center with an overwhelming majority of them charred to death. Accordingly, the very first scene of Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close is a private lesson in the consequence of closure. The questions being, how can there ever be a funeral without a body? What happens to the bond you share with someone who isn’t there anymore? Will you get to find the answers on your own? When will you learn to stop missing those who are never coming back?
It’s a riddle.
Yes, there are still moments when you’d want to punch the young protagonist for his obnoxious intellect. However, those moments are outweighed by the thickness he brings to the plot with his exceedingly mature doubts. He adds meaning to the tragedy that doesn’t make sense as he is on to something because he knows stuff kids his age don’t have a clue about. In an unforgettably strong scene, he espouses that those died in WTC are alive in the lungs of those who didn’t. When the buildings collapsed, bodies turned into dust and dispersed into the environs According to him, New Yorkers were unknowingly breathing in and out particles of folks whose memories are all that is left with those who care.
Conclusion: Something was clearly wrong with me the first time i watched this splendid movie.
