The Immigrant (James Gray, 2014)

[The Narrator Returns]

James Gray's The Immigrant is a frontrunner for my favorite movie of the year so far. Fantastic performances all around, and possibly Darius Khondji's most beautiful cinematography yet. If you get a chance to see it in theaters (I'm not sure if the Weinsteins will allow you that chance, since it seems they are straight burying this movie), do so at your earliest opportunity.

The trailer for Zach Braff's latest that played before the movie, however, was not so good. It featured at least two of the most laughably pretentious images I've seen in quite some time, and far too many shots of people cathartically screaming or running in slow-motion.

[FerdinandGriffon]

The Immigrant is the best American film I've seen in about four years, a triumph for Gray, who until now has frequently flirted with greatness without actually consummating it. Many of his defendants like to call him novelistic. I've always considered that compliment pejorative. Most "novelistic" films are dull and overly script reliant, just as most "painterly" shots ("Every still could be framed and put on the wall!") are garish and lifeless. The Immigrant is cinematic, as much so as a film byVon Sternberg or Wong, two notable antecedents of Gray's increasingly complex visual style. Drawn on an enormous canvas, both in terms of production and the world it resurrects, it is nonetheless content to slowly narrow its focus to only a few small details (an apartment, a song, a few gestures of love or viciousness) until it rediscovers everything else mirrored in them. It is a traumatizing film, one that dwells on and in emotions that are unreconcilable, that, though powerful, refuse to make the world a simpler place. Marion Cotillard's performance is a wonder, a thing of delicacy and subtlety , even in moments of vertiginous drama, and Phoenix has never been better, thanks in part to a director willing for once to allow him to act, rather than simply content to wallow in the timbre of his voice and the irregularity of his features. It is not a perfect film, with one puzzling misstep (the dream sequence) and several moments of narrative crudeness that beg the question of Weinstein meddling. Neither of these things are enough to discredit all the good it does. That it has been ignored in favor of so many far inferior films that it shares a certain amount of pedigree with is hopefully only a cruel quirk of fate, though in all likelihood a more sinister omen.

[rohmerin]

The film needs more footage. The two male characters never works as they should.
Cinematography is too beautiful, golden, nice. A big disappointment.

[hearthesilence]

After reading so much praise for this film, I was also letdown. It's a beautiful film, there's nothing terrible about it, everything's done well, but it also felt pretty thin, even in scenes that seemed designed to get under the skin.

[Drucker]

After reading so much praise for this film, I was also letdown. It's a beautiful film, there's nothing terrible about it, everything's done well, but it also felt pretty thin, even in scenes that seemed designed to get under the skin.

Agreed. Felt like there were some missed opportunities. It felt like some things were set-up that could be interesting (such as the sexual underworld and early 20th-century prostitution), but we didn't go far enough into it.

SpoilerShow

At the same time, while it turns out the whole film really was about finding her sister, that too didn't get enough of a focus. Yes, she's gathering money for her the whole time, but it kept seeming like the film was going in a different direction and was maybe more of a personal portrait of our protagonist than really the rescue operation it turned out to be.

Again, a lot of good elements and some great performances, but I wish they had focused more on a few things instead of what I feel was like jumping around a little bit.

[FerdinandGriffon]

What makes you feel that the end of the film is more about the rescue operation itself than what it means to Eva? I didn't get that sense at all.

And I think it's greatly to the film's benefit that it doesn't become a discursive textbook on the many, many aspects of the period that it ties in so deftly. It's Eva's film, and even the two male leads only become significant in that they are so in her eyes.

Edit: I should qualify that last statement. Bruno and Emil are rich, developed characters with an interior life we catch glimpses of, but the film is from Eva's perspective, so they remain opaque, as they are to her.

[javi82]

For me, this film really had a lot of echoes of La Strada. Although the plot and setting differ in large ways, I felt like Ewa and Gelsomina, Bruno and Zampanò, and Emil and The Fool were striking analogs, and their relationships to each other were pretty similar. Bruno's show is also a bit like a circus act. Both films kind of rely on their actresses faces to a large extent: Marion Cotillard's and Giulietta Masina's. Maybe I'm just seeing what I want to see though.

[FerdinandGriffon]

Well, Two Lovers seemed to be in the shadow of L'Avventura to a great degree, so I think Italian cinema of that era is very much on Gray's mind. The La Strada parallels didn't occur to me, though the core dynamic did remind me very much of the love square(?) at the heart of Dostoevsky's The Idiot, though made a triangle and with some of the genders reversed. And now I remember that Two Lovers was a White Nights adaptation, the connection seems clearer.

[Drucker]

Ferdinand, I actually found the relationship between the cousins one of the more interesting aspects of the film.

SpoilerShow

My wife and I agreed the murder is one of the most surprising and best moments of the film all around.

But back to the question at hand:

SpoilerShow

I didn't get the sense that Eva has grown at all. She's a smart girl, and certainly smarter than the people she's taken advantage of. But through it all, she endures what she endures to earn back her sister. Phoenix's character realizes this, and makes a sacrifice on his part once he loses the money he needed to fulfill Eva's wish. I got the sense that Eva is a woman who is strong and puts herself through hell to reunite with her sister. Which kind of put me off honestly, because while we don't get to see ENOUGH of her periphery, I also didn't feel that there was a lot going on in the middle of the film that serves to remind us of how the film eventually ends.

[FerdinandGriffon]

Well, to endure isn't necessarily a passive act. She doesn't change in terms of her basic outlook on the world or her general mode of being, but she does find herself in an increasingly complex situation where it takes an evolving and intensifying idea of morality in order to stay afloat, keep on going, and not descend into despair. She must find a way to understand and forgive both men, for their sake and for hers. And she also learns that as smart and wary and upright as she can be, the world she lives in is stronger than her, stronger than any individual, and that she has to find a way to rely on others if she's going to continue to live. The film is about the value of other people, something she comes into the film understanding better than any other character she encounters, but that she has to take even further to heart and mind if she wants to continue to live and help the person who means more than anything to her.

[javi82]

Well, to endure isn't necessarily a passive act. She doesn't change in terms of her basic outlook on the world or her general mode of being, but she does find herself in an increasingly complex situation where it takes an evolving and intensifying idea of morality in order to stay afloat, keep on going, and not descend into despair.

Agree with this. I think the key scene is when she is in the confessional with the priest. She laments that because of what she has had to do, heaven will be closed off to her; the priest assures her that no one is beyond redemption. That she has believed that her actions to help her sister have jeopardized her eternal fate up until that point underscores the devotion she has to her sister. This also seems to be the turning point for Bruno as he eavesdrops on the exchange.

[hearthesilence]

Those aren't bad scenes, they're acted well, but in retrospect, they feel too dry to me. I'm willing to give it another shot, but I felt there was a lot of material that was designed to have some weight to it, and while it wasn't executed poorly, it just didn't have the punch I think it was supposed to, at least for me.

[warren oates]

Just caught this on Netflix streaming. I never would have sought it out had it not been for this thread, but I'm glad I did. I agree with the praise this film has garnered above. I'm not really a fan of the other work of Gray's that I've seen, but this film is something else. There's a subtle kind of mastery and idiosyncrasy to the unfolding of the film, which had seemed at first like it would be rather conventional. I'm usually the first guy to complain about the writing, but I didn't mind some of the waywardness of the storytelling here and I would second some defenses of it FG has made previously, that a lot of this is by design, to keep the characters and the audience on their toes, to not ever settle into a comfortable or predictable rhythm. Even though it's a comparatively small production The Immigrant, like Once Upon A Time In America, feels almost epic in its evocation of the past.

Really a gorgeous looking film. Would love to see it again on Blu-ray. Anybody have the import? Also: Is there any evidence that Gray didn't have final cut and/or that Harvey Weinstein chopped this down below the two-hour mark to appease theater owners, most of whom he then didn't even bother sending this to?

[domino harvey]

Would love to see it again on Blu-ray. Anybody have the import?

It's Wild Side so I assume the French subs are forced. Love to be wrong though

[repeat]

You mean it's not coming out on Blu in the States? There's a Scandinavian Blu-ray coming out at the end of this month, and definitely no fear of forced subs on that one.

[warren oates]

No reason to suspect it won't, but who knows when. Seems like maybe the Weinstein Company is dragging its feet and trying to optimize other revenue windows. Anyway, here's a short but interesting interview with director James Gray.

[Luke M]

I watched this based on so many here including it in their 'dynamic top 10' lists. I, too, was disappointed by it. I didn't feel an emotional pull towards any of the characters or the plight of Eva. I never even felt like we got to know Eva very well. The other characters were developed a little better.

While watching the film, I thought this was going to serve as a parable to the plight of immigrants today. However, the twist ending undermined that idea.

[Dansu Dansu Dansu]

While watching the film, I thought this was going to serve as a parable to the plight of immigrants today. However, the twist ending undermined that idea.

SpoilerShow

I don't believe that any suffering featured in the film is negated by the relatively happy ending for Ewa, but also, by the end of the film, the title could refer to either Ewa or Bruno, which actually reinforces the idea of suffering. The film is not merely interested in how immigrants are exploited, but in how they find themselves perpetuating the exploitation once they no longer feel empathy for the victim due to the ubiquity of the cycle and the desperation of their situation. It's mentioned several times in the film that Bruno was an entirely different person in the past, which implies a similar story arc as Ewa, albeit one without forced prostitution and the patriarchal influences she faces. There's a parallel between Ewa's relationship with her sister and Bruno's relationship with his cousin; Ewa reaches the junction where she could become like Bruno, but ultimately she doesn't allow external pressures to distort her perception of humanity strictly into terms of ownership and societal position.

[davoarid]

I apologize if this is a childish view, but did anyone else think that Renner's magic show at Ellis Island was too good? I had a hard time accepting that a magician as polished and talented as that would be relegated to something as seedy as Joaquin Phoenix's club, even if he was family.

[Lost Highway]

I loved the atmosphere and look of the film, which reminded me of The Godfather II. The film had a tremendous sense of place and time. I was less convinced by the ensuing melodrama and the characters. For once I felt the usually excellent Joaquin Phoenix was miscast. He lacks the sense of danger which would have energised a film, which I thought was dramatically inert. Two Lovers was my favourite film of 2008 and maybe my expectations were too high. I will give this another watch soon though.

[whaleallright]

I apologize if this is a childish view, but did anyone else think that Renner's magic show at Ellis Island was too good? I had a hard time accepting that a magician as polished and talented as that would be relegated to something as seedy as Joaquin Phoenix's club, even if he was family.

I think this was in keeping with the prevailing romanticism, which mixes headily with but finally supersedes the film's claims to realism. it's important that the magician's first appearance be somewhat wondrous and otherworldly. for a moment we see his idealized self, as he would like to be perceived and as Ewa occasionally perceives him. when we realize he's as childish and petty as everyone else, it's disappointing to us as well as to Ewa.

that said, I wasn't quite as enthusiastic about this movie as were some folks whose opinions I respect. I thought that at times it was excessively self-conscious. the final shot is a case in point:

SpoilerShow

it's a clever shot, keeping Ewa's triumph and Bruno's defeat in the same frame, but I felt that it was too emphatic, too eager to impress. it made its point, then kept going and going.

I did admire the simplicity and emotionality of the story. I really could imagine it being made as a silent film by Griffith or Vidor. but I don't think either of these great melodramatists would have lingered on that final image so long.

I also agree that Phoenix was too mopey to fully convey the charm and violence that seem important parts of his character in theory. as a pimp, Bruno seems both too nice and not nice enough. imagine the role going to, say, James Cagney and suddenly the melodrama makes more sense. I wish Phoenix could have channeled a bit more of the ferocity he exhibits in The Master.

btw I thought J. Hoberman's comments on this film were pretty interesting.

[pistolwink]

I don't know; I thought the way that Phoenix's performance highlights Bruno's pathetic qualities (in the sense of being fundamentally miserable, insecure, and bumbling) was pretty excellent - and crucial to selling the final few scenes.
I really loved this movie, though I'll admit it has a fair amount of clumsy, overly literal, and/or unnecessary expository dialogue.

[Lakme]

U.S. Blu-ray release finally set for April 7

[jason80]

Joaquin Phoenix left the best impression to me throughout the whole movie.
Perhaps that includes his character that is more dynamic than Marion's, which is especially visible near the end of the movie.

The first part seemed a little slow to me, but after perhaps one third of the movie, it started drawing my attention.

[colinr0380]

Major spoilers:

I found this extremely moving with a beautiful handling of some really complicated, emotionally messy relationships. It is a melodramatic film in the best sense of the word, reaching enormous peaks of emotion punctuated by sharp and sudden blows to the gut. I don't know if others found this to be the case but I also found it to be an extremely tense film. I was always nervous for Ewa, especially in the final scene. There's no reason to believe that anyone will keep their word, and Ewa is back in the lion's den that has always been waiting for her, but there's no other option except to hope. Or rather to have faith and pray not to have been overlooked.

I loved the way that the film peers at the characters, Ewa in particular, as if we are children peeking around a doorway or stuck listening to adults fighting in the other room. Or the camera looks at her through imperfect, distorted glass. There are the occasional mirrors too, though the characters can barely look at themselves in them for long.

Everything is a transaction and a commodity in the new world that Ewa and her sister have fled to, particularly the body of a woman. Even the statue of one. Its all about representing yourself properly for money. Casual distractions, postures and entertainments take precedence over dangerously destructive, half-understood real desires and goals. The short term goal is shameful and endless but tangible and ever present (despite the pefectly positioned fade outs or characters drifting back into shadow as if to try and hide from or conceal the shame that everyone is well aware of), the long term goals become nebulous and illusory. What does the sister look like again? Will we ever see her or a wider world beyond the tenements of New York and Ellis Island?

The two cousins are perfect matches for each other. They're both performers and both love acting out. Someone irrationally and violently earnest against someone perhaps far too casual, both almost cruelly so. Both of the cousins treat Ewa with a strange mixture of tenderness and coercion. Being complicit with her one moment, fundamentally betraying her the next. Almost paternal over protectiveness switches to blunt pimping out. Is there a dichotomy in a world becoming more and more about how much money you bring to the table each evening rather than love? When an unrequited obsession has to be composed into a business partnership.

I like the way that the glass immediately becomes much clearer once Emile turns up too, as if he has calmed, or clarified, things for Ewa. But he's just as poor for Ewa as Bruno, perhaps worse, and so the mirrors cake with dirt again, and the pretty flower decays rather than staying perfect and pure white.

It becomes quite a religious film in its final act, though the film seems to view the act of worship with a w(e)ary eye, perhaps as concerned about a callous or corrupt God who might damn a sinner with a pure heart as much as it later is about corrupt cops either beating or aiding our characters depending on who is paying who. The confessional scene is utterly heart-rending, more for the weight that Ewa has taken upon herself that floods out of her. Her confession allows her in some ways to reflect on her history and to organise her thoughts about it. I love that it is not just a simple condemnation of the people who have destroyed her hope and innocence (they performed the acts, but they know not what they do) but more an outpouring of the doubts their imposed actions caused Ewa to have about herself. Of whether any goodness in her has been scoured away by the way she has been forced to live. Is atonement possible?

I also love that the spied upon confessional scene (yet another betrayal of Ewa) is only the first of a succession of scenes that pound into the audience from this point onwards that involve a character bearing witness. They recognise Ewa's decency and it reflects their own shortcomings back at them like a harsh mirror. To their credit almost all characters who have this moment have an epiphany (except for one lady across the hall who is upset by Bruno's obsession with Ewa), but devastatingly almost (again with one exception) every character is unable to act on their new feelings, even when they wish to.

On that final confession - I like to think that Ewa knew about the very first manipulation of her into detention and the beating wasn't entirely for that confession but for Bruno's arrogance in still trying and failing to control every single aspect of their relationship. Even the parting has to be done his way, with his benediction. But despite the self-styled self-sacrifice he is not a martyr and theirs wasn't a great romance, just two people pushed together through common bonds before being flung their separate ways again.

And what a final shot!
___

Another thing I liked about the film: the faces of the extras in the crowd scenes.

...did anyone else think that Renner's magic show at Ellis Island was too good? I had a hard time accepting that a magician as polished and talented as that would be relegated to something as seedy as Joaquin Phoenix's club, even if he was family.

I think this was in keeping with the prevailing romanticism, which mixes headily with but finally supersedes the film's claims to realism. it's important that the magician's first appearance be somewhat wondrous and otherworldly. for a moment we see his idealized self, as he would like to be perceived and as Ewa occasionally perceives him. when we realize he's as childish and petty as everyone else, it's disappointing to us as well as to Ewa.

I agree on both these points and I like the contrast of the magic show being performed for the presumably soon to be deported immigrants on Ellis Island who react with credulity, amazement and rapturous applause (while Ewa misses the early moment of magic because of looking for her sister in the crowd) and then the replaying of the magic show to a jeering and cat-calling audience at Bruno's strip club later on (these club scenes made me think in a strange way of The Killing of a Chinese Bookie!). It is almost as if we are seeing the magic as more than real in the Ellis Island scene. And I seem to remember that Emile fails to do any magic tricks during his act at the club due to the situation that unfolds there.
___

There's almost a Dancer In The Dark-feel to the way that everything goes from one extreme to the other for Ewa so quickly, particularly in one pivotal scene two-thirds of the way through the film. The collapse of order is sudden and irreversible, and all the more devastating for being so easily avoided.

Also are the eyes in the shop next to the entrance to the apartment meant to allude to The Great Gatsby?

Also, while watching the film I was regularly reminded of another great film about an immigrant fresh off the boat being coerced into the 'family business' before beginning a submissive-dominant relationship with a thuggish-yet-compelling brute who himself is rather under the thumb of a brothel/nightclub madame. That would be Leonard Schrader's Naked Tango, which would make an excellent double bill with The Immigrant. (By the way Naked Tango would be a perfect film for Arrow Video to rescue: neglected, erotic and surprisingly good!). The telling differences however are that Naked Tango is, as the title suggests, all about sexual desire and forbidden lusts. The Immigrant is about defilement and endurance and a denial of passion either by the heroine herself or others on her behalf. While Naked Tango ends in a climactic cathartic and operatic blood bath to rival anything by Tarantino, The Immigrant is more open ended and unsure about the fates of its characters. And while the heroine in Naked Tango is someone looking to escape from an imposed identity by perhaps inadvisedly getting into someone elses's shoes thereby willingly losing herself to her new life, at least at first, the heroine in The Immigrant, for all the trials and the desperate escape from tragedy in the Old World carries her past inside of her and has the goal of her sister to keep her focused. She always knows where she's come from and what she has to steel herself to do to achieve her goals, despite setbacks along the way.