Showing posts with label aki kaurismaki. Show all posts
Showing posts with label aki kaurismaki. Show all posts

Thursday, 27 December 2012

Aki Kaurismaki's Match Factory Girl [Stills]

155374255864552700_dbidtsy2_c

Kaurismäki took his penchant for despairing character studies to unspeakably grim depths in the shockingly entertaining The Match Factory Girl. Kati Outinen is memorably impenetrable as Iris, whose grinding days as a cog in a factory wheel, and nights as a neglected daughter living with her parents, ultimately send her over the edge. Yet despite her transgressions, Kaurismäki makes Iris a compelling, even sympathetic figure. Bleak yet suffused with comic irony, The Match Factory Girl closes out the “Proletariat Trilogy” with a bang—and a whimper. —The Criterion Collection

Thursday, 20 December 2012

The Great Acting Blog: "My 5 Favourite Performances Of 2012"

Irene Jacob in The Dust Of Time (Theo Angelopoulos)
An epic performance by Jacob, in a film which spans decades. She not only manages the shift in age without fuss, but she also delivers a performance of astonishing sensitivity but which is neither self-pitying nor self-promoting - it's honest and true. An example of the high artistry which acting can be.
I blogged more fully on Irene Jacob in "The Shy Poetry Of Irene Jacob"

Andre Wilms in Le Havre (Aki Kaurismaki)

A wonderful example of laid-back-cut-the-crap simplicity, which sits perfectly in the cinematic universe of Aki Kaurismaki. Wilms plays an aging ex-bohemian-turned-shoe-shiner, who hides an immigrant on the run from the police. Every moment of Wilm's performance rings utterly true, and, along with his charm, creates something warming and moving.

Thomas Doret in The Kid With A Bike (Jean-Pierre & Luc Dardenne)

An immensely powerful performance from Doret, playing an abandoned and unloved 12 year old. His scenes of rejection are heartbreaking, as is his scene involving a show of self-loathing. Doret resists the temptation to embellish his scenes with exposition and manipulate the audience, instead he is direct, and this directness is the true source of his power in this performance. Doret went a long way in changing my generally negative view of child actors. 
I blogged more fully on Doret's performance here

Denis Lavant in Holy Motors (Leos Carax)

Lavant plays a whole range of characters from an assasin to a beggar to a monster to a family man, and all during one night. It's a great role for any actor, but to which Lavant brings his intense physicality and innate strangeness. It's a unique, bravura performance, which must be seen to be believed.

Teresa Madruga in Tabu (Miguel Gomes)

Madruga's performance is marked by a sadness, and a lonliness, and which is rarely displayed openly, it is more a question of Madruga's prescence, as when she finds out a student who was meant to be staying with her now isn't, we feel her disappointment rather than see it. It is also a performance which is inflected by the film's visuals; director Gomes employs a magnificent black and white, and often the camera is static, which creates an emptiness and emotional flatness.

Monday, 19 November 2012

Drifting Clouds Cinema Blog: "Nuts4R2 Reviews Aki Kaurismaki's The Man Without A Past"

NUTS4R2

 

The Man Without A Past

Aki Breaky Heart

 The Man Without A Past (Mies Vailla Menneisyyttä) 
2002 Finland/Germany/France
Directed by Aki Kaurismäki
ICA Projects Region 2

It would be untrue to say that not much happens in an Aki Kaurismäki movie... it just seems like nothing happens because it’s all so laid back.

This is not exactly my first experience of movies by this incredible film-maker... but I haven’t seen too much of his work and it was all such a long time ago, so I can’t claim to be able to comment wisely about his particular stylistic traits. Back in the 80s or possibly the early 90s, I saw Hamlet Goes Business and Leningrad Cowboys Go America on TV. I think I saw either Ariel or The Match Factory Girl too... but I just can’t remember which one it was.

What I do remember of these is that they seemed fairly minimalist in nature, were usually quite bleak in outlook and had a good amount of heart to them. The same could be said, in some ways, about The Man Without A Past... apart from the fact that, although it still carries a certain bleak attitude, soaking through the celluloidal pores, directly from Kurasmaki’s brain to your eyes and ears... in many ways, this film is a bit of a ‘feel good’ movie. I think Kurasmaki might well say the same thing too... but I’d have to look into his work a little more. I do remember reading an interview with him, and possibly seeing one too, back in the 80s/90s and his miserable outlook seemed heavily promoted by him to the interviewers, almost like it was part of his branding.

The Man Without A Past tells the story of a man who comes to town looking for work, only to be badly beaten up and left for dead by three young thugs who take his suitcase and money. He is wrapped in bandages but then promptly dies in hospital and is pronounced dead by the staff, who exit the hospital room.  He then, of course, revives and wanders out of hospital, still in bandages, to collapse by a river. In a sequence which seems to be fairly like what I remember of Kurasmaki’s ability to pile one misfortune on after another, rather like waiting for that extra last brick to fall on Ollie’s head in a Laurel and Hardy short, a passerby then steals his boots and replaces them with what he is wearing.

He is then found by a family who live in an impoverished community that inhabit metal containers (which they rent) and the rest of the film is pretty much about how he faces up against his plight, as the mugging has left him with no memory of who he is and what his former life might have been. He slowly turns himself around and even gets a girlfriend, who works with the Salvation Army and gets him some clothes and a job with them until he gets on his feet. He does get on his feet fairly quickly, growing a crop of potatoes by his rented container, inspiring the Salvation Army band by exposing them to rock n’ roll on his juke box (which he gets for his container) and then managing them, and also getting a job as a welder while the band is taking off.

Everything is done with an absolutely straight face and penchant for an acceptance of the inevitable misery of life which is an endearing feature of Kurasmaki’s work (what I’ve seen of it) and which is a trait shard by pretty much all the characters in his films. Everyone is truthful and honest about their lot in life, weighing up their words before every response and pretty much relating on a fairly minimal but honest and up front level with each other. This is not how the majority of the universe tends to work, especially in Western culture, but this is how the ‘kurasmakiverse’ works and we’re left to accept and get on with it or leave the movie.

In the meantime, there’s a dog, a bank robbery, police harassment and a confrontation with the former life the main protagonist had when it finally catches up to him, but everything works out fairly upbeat for everybody in the end... muffled, but upbeat.

The pacing is beautiful and relentlessly casual, which makes everything feel a bit less hectic than it actually sounds. The movie is crammed full of incident but you kind of let it wash over you because of the way the shots are framed and edited, and even by the way the camera moves through these shots, in easily digestible, long, slow takes which derail any clutter implied by the narrative incident. This then leaves you in a head space, dictated by the pacing, where you can absorb the details of the characters and their reactions to each other in a way that gives you time to assess the situation and appreciate the emotions underlying them, in contrast to their stoic exteriors. Hollywood filmmakers could possibly learn a thing or two from this kind of conflict between incident and pace but, then again, their target audience is probably perceived differently and until they rethink the tolerance of their audience, they won’t benefit from this kind of approach to film-making, is my guess.

The main problem I had with the movie is that it’s fairly clichéd. It’s easy to predict what’s going to happen to the characters from one scene to the next and I don’t think this is specifically because the pacing is leisurely enough to give you time to do so... I think it’s more a problem with the writing than anything to do with direction. I didn’t feel too let down by that, though, except maybe right at the end, because the film is such a nice experience to sit through. It’s basically a love story at heart... and I’m always a sucker for a well made love story (and there are so few good ones made that are worth watching... the US seems to have lost the art of making them somewhere around the tail end of the fifties, it seems to me).

All said and done, The Man Without A Past is a cracking, well paced, easily absorbed movie which will slowly sink into you as you watch. It’s maybe a little too predictable and upbeat for its own good at times but, ultimately, it’s not doing anything you really don’t want it to do and it leaves the characters at a place where you’d want to leave them. A nice little movie to watch on your own on a quiet evening. Give it a look some time.

 

Read more by Nuts4R2 here

Follow Nuts4R2 on Twitter

Sunday, 7 October 2012

Aki Kaurismaki's on the acting technique of Matti Pellonpaa ....

Matti
"The late Matti Pellonpää used exactly the same method as an actor. I gave him the script and he read it at once. Then he didn’t touch it for three months until just prior to the shooting, mainly to learn the dialogue. He used his subconscious to develop the character and to do all the work, like a lazy man would. His subconscious did all the work that a lesser actor would’ve burdened himself with."

Via Film Comment

Saturday, 29 September 2012

Aki Kaurismaki on not using storyboards....

"After all, I don’t have any storyboards. The first shot leads to another, and so on. Only when the previous shot is finished I start to plan the next. And I don’t believe storyboards would help. You can lose something because you can’t react to what the scene itself produces. Shots mechanically prepared in advance turn against themselves. The film ends up feeling too well made."

 

Originally published in an interview for Film Comment

Saturday, 22 September 2012

TONIGHT!! Free screening of Aki Kaurismaki's I Hired A Contract Killer, @ The Gallery Cafe, Bethnal Green! Hope To See There!

(NB - the film is in English, although this clip from Youtube is dubbed in Finnish).

 

Dear Friends,

I am delighted to announce that our next screening will be Aki Kaurismaki's I Hired A Contract Killer

I don't know if you've seen I Hired A Contract Killer before, but it is a fabulous, absurd film noir, with Jean-Pierre Leaud and Margi Clarke, and there's live music by Joe Strummer. Most of it was shot in Stoke Newington but the film is hardly known at all in the UK, and although Kaurismaki got some note recently with Le Havre, I still think his work is criminally under-appreciated in this country, and I want to set that right.

The screening is free, & will be on Saturday, September 22nd, @ 5pm, at The Gallery Cafe, 21 Old Ford Road, Bethnal Green, E2 9PL


I've posted a link below for directions to the venue, plus some words about the film.

We have an open house policy, the more the merrier, so I hope to see you there!


James

http://thegallerycafe.wordpress.com/contact-us/

 


I Hired a Contract Killer (1990)- 79 mins (Aki Kaurismaki)
Starring; Jean-Pierre Leaud, Margi Clarke, Nicky Tesco, Serge Reggiani, Kenneth Colley, Joe Strummer.


After fifteen years’ service, Henri Boulanger is made redundant from his job. Shocked, he attempts suicide, but can’t go through with it, so he hires a contract killer in a seedy bar to murder him at some unspecified time in the future. But almost immediately he meets and falls in love with Margaret, a flower-seller, which makes Henri realise that his life has some meaning after all. But when he goes back to the bar to cancel the contract, he finds it has been demolished – and there’s no way he can get in touch with the killer…

Still002

Monday, 17 September 2012

The Face Of Another: "Jean-Pierre Leaud in Kaurismaki's I Hired A Contract Killer"

Jpl02

I am delighted to announce that we will be screening Aki Kaurismaki's I Hired A Contract Killer.

I don't know if you've seen I Hired A Contract Killer before, but it is a fabulous, absurd film noir, with Jean-Pierre Leaud and Margi Clarke, and there's live music by Joe Strummer. Most of it was shot in Stoke Newington but the film is hardly known at all in the UK, and although Kaurismaki got some note recently with Le Havre, I still think his work is criminally under-appreciated in this country, and I want to set that right.

The screening is free, & will be on Saturday, September 22nd, @ 5pm, at The Gallery Cafe, 21 Old Ford Road, Bethnal Green, E2 9PL


I've posted a link below for directions to the venue, plus some words about the film.

We have an open house policy, the more the merrier, so I hope to see you there!


James

http://thegallerycafe.wordpress.com/contact-us/

 

 


I Hired a Contract Killer (1990)- 79 mins (Aki Kaurismaki)
Starring; Jean-Pierre Leaud, Margi Clarke, Nicky Tesco, Serge Reggiani, Kenneth Colley, Joe Strummer.


After fifteen years’ service, Henri Boulanger is made redundant from his job. Shocked, he attempts suicide, but can’t go through with it, so he hires a contract killer in a seedy bar to murder him at some unspecified time in the future. But almost immediately he meets and falls in love with Margaret, a flower-seller, which makes Henri realise that his life has some meaning after all. But when he goes back to the bar to cancel the contract, he finds it has been demolished – and there’s no way he can get in touch with the killer…

Wednesday, 2 May 2012

The Great Acting Blog: "The Acting Style Of Phone Box Gun"

Phoneboxgun_2

 

Phone Box Gun, my new short film, will be a minimalist heist movie, which I intend to shoot in black and white. It's about a young man, Vincent, who needs cash in order to visit his long lost sister in Mexico, and so, under the influence of his blustering best friend, Bob, decides to stick-up a jewellery store. Visually, and in terms of rhythm, the film owes a little to the film noir of Aki Kaurismaki, especially his London based film, I Hired A Contract Killer. I always try also to give the dialogue a certain rhythm and structure, which owes less to Kaurismaki and more to American auteur, Hal Hartley. When I started writing screenplays in my late teens (for fun), I instinctively wrote dialogue that was highly formalized, deliberate, but was told that this was wrong, that dialogue in films had to be “naturalistic”. It was years later I discovered the films of Hal Hartley, and for anyone unfamiliar with his work, Hartley crafts his dialogue until it is a “beautiful object”, and is infact one of the most distinctive features of his cinema, and a joy for the viewer. And so upon discovering his films, I decided that I would continue to write crafted dialogue. While what I'm doing is not going quite as far as Hartley, what I hope to do is structure the dialogue such that it compels the actor to say his next line, it thrusts him forward – here's an extract from Phone Box Gun to show what I mean:

BOB
So, you're short of money.

VINCENT
Nah man, it's not that bad.

BOB
You're short of money.

VINCENT
It's not that bad.

BOB
How much do you need?

VINCENT
I'm saying, it's not that bad.

BOB
How much do you need?

VINCENT
I've said, it's not that bad.
BOB
Tell me.

 


While this is not a particularly high stakes, heightened dramatic scene, it's clear that both characters want something different – if played properly, ie; each actor working off his scene partner (as oppose to merely trotting out the lines as he rehearsed them, ignoring what his partner is doing in the scene), then the result will be a snappy intensity, bringing the actors alive. In addition, the actor needs to bring a concretely doable action into the scene, in order to live truthfully under the imaginary circumstances of the scene. And crucially, what the actor is doing in the scene, is not the same as what the character is doing. I'll explain.

In a quick analysis of the scene above, we might conclude that what Bob is literally doing is;  “trying to find out how much money Vincent needs” (you may find a different analysis, there is no perfect analysis). However, the actor playing Bob will never be able to convince himself that he actually is Bob and that the other actor actually is Vincent, and that the money actually exists, and that the scene is anything other than a fiction. So, the actor needs to get away from the fiction,  and give himself something in the scene which he can actually accomplish, something he can actually do. If I was playing Bob in the scene above, I might give myself the action; “to get a straight answer” - this concretely doable, I can begin doing it immediately, and it is in line with the intentions of the script, and it's interesting to me. Armed with that action, I then take the attention off myself in the scene, and put it onto the other actor, responding to him in relation to my action. This enables the actor to perform fully and truthfully. But note that the action I have given myself has got nothing to do with the money, or Vincent.

I-hired-a-contract-killer

Overall, the acting in Phone Box Gun will be fairly minimal, not bravura, but pared back, simple, perhaps alluding to classical noir. The world of Phone Box Gun is shabby and tired, the characters are low-grade, and they have a purposelessness, it is as though they are treading water and marking time, they act merely to avoid stillness. Perhaps then, this minimal quality, marks a deadness within the characters, they are not real people, they exist as images of figures occupying a certain space during a certain moment -  as in a memory or a dream.

Wednesday, 21 December 2011

The Great Acting Blog: "Flipping Between Mindsets"

Before I head back to Ireland to complete filming on Rouzbeh Rashidi's HE (which is going to be an utterly sublime feature, by the way), I intend to squeeze in a quickie short film, called Phone Box Gun. It'll be a Kaurismakian film noir, about a jewellery heist, where I'll finally get the chance to wave a Beretta about and wear a false beard, and further, just because I enjoy making life difficult, I'll also be directing the film aswell as acting in it.

Whenever I've tried my hand at filmmaking in the past, I've gone into it with too aggressive a mindset, which I think is inappropriate. An aggressive mindset is very good for acting (or, indeed, writing) because acting requires short bursts of heightened intensity, which are generated in the moment of performance. Filmmaking, I believe, requires a slow burn kind of energy – a filmmaker needs to be able to function consistently well over the period of time of the shoot, making many decisions, being alive to mishaps. The filmmaker is required to manage other people, which means he needs to ensure he is available for them, and create conditions whereby they can work happily.The filmmaker is at the centre of everything, all eyes are on him. The actor need only concern himself with himself, and the singular act of his performance, and all of his attention is dedicated to that, he need not multi-task – and that's just the way most actors like it,  because most actors are minimalists, it's the philosopher aspect of their work, favouring clarity and simplicity (this becomes very evident when actors move behind the camera), however, this is not a pre-requisite for the job, but certainly a common trait I have witnessed. It's also worth noting that a relaxed body and mind is crucial to the actor's work, and so another reason why they don't want to be pre-occupied with anything else. The poor filmmaker is often under stress, as he skits around, trying to keep all the plates spinning. The life of the actor sounds positively leisurely in comparison to that of the filmmaker, which of course it is, apart from that battle with the awesome which takes place during the performance (I've met more than one director who started out as an actor, but switched because they could not cope with the pressure of the performance). Acting requires a laser-like in-the-moment precision, and to deliver that requires immense discipline, mental strength, and self-control, all difficult, improved only over a long period of practice. Directors need a certain kind of generosity, a magnanimity, because they are handling different personalities, with differing talents – a director needs, to a certain extent, a big tent, whereas actors needs only a sleeping bag. 

To be a filmmaker requires a certain kind of humility: he is responsible for everything, yet much of the production is out of his control. Setting up the shot may take time, it may not go according to plan, but the key is to accept this state of affairs, not grind against it, which will only lead to fatigue and a diminishment in the quality of the work. It's also being aware that everybody else is doing their best, and it is upto the filmmaker to be able to articulate what he wants in a way that is useful and practical to the person he is speaking too. Much of this then, is a preparation issue, being ready to explain yourself, being ready to communicate – if the filmmaker cannot articulate himself properly, he should refrain altogether, and let cast and crew go about their work. I think this is the  aspect I need to work on most. I find managing people to be tedious, which is why I prefer to work with independent types, who think for themselves and take their work seriously, just getting on with it. Also, so much of acting is about energy conservation, and articulating what you want is energy draining. Therefore, directing and acting in the same production, requires compartmentalisation,  flipping between the two mindsets as and when. The point is, committing totally to the scene when acting in it, then, when the scene is over, stepping out of it, and looking at it with a director's eye. 

On Phone Box Gun, I intend to be more relaxed about how the production will unfold, and flip flop more consciously between the mindsets of actor and director, as oppose to jumbling it all together, and pushing it through by force of will. Hopefully, this adjustment to my previous approach, will lead to greater productivity, and ultimately serve the film better.

Saturday, 20 November 2010

Drifting Clouds Recommends: "Drifting Clouds"

 

I named my film group after this masterpiece by Aki Kaurismaki, about the triumph of the human spirit.

 

 Drifting Clouds

 BY ROGER EBERT / July 10, 1998

 

 

 

 

 

Cast & Credits
Ilona: Kati Outinen
Lauri: Kari Vaeaenaenen
Melartin: Sakari Kuosmanen
Pianist: Shelley Fisher
Tax Inspector: Tero Jartti

Written And Directed By Aki Kaurismaki. Running Time: 96 Minutes. Not Rated (Mature Themes, No Objectionable Material).

 

 

Aki Kaurismaki is the 40-ish Finnish director of strange and quirky comedies, in which little people are crushed by vast economic systems, but they keep on truckin'. In ``Drifting Clouds,'' a woman loses her job at a bankrupt restaurant, her husband is laid off by the transport system, their TV is repossessed, she pays her savings to an employment agency for another job, she isn't paid, and when her husband tries to collect he gets beaten up. But there's a happy ending.

Kaurismaki has enormous love for these characters. He embraces their comic pathos, and rejoices that they do not surrender. It's all done with such subtle irony that critics use words like ``minimalist'' to describe him--even though his screen is saturated with images and ideas, and true minimalism is more easily seen in something like ``Armageddon,'' which has half an idea, and spreads it thinly over 144 minutes.

The heroine of ``Drifting Clouds'' is Ilona (Kati Outinen), a wan, sweet blond with a dour expression who works as the manager of a failing restaurant. The movie opens with a pianist singing of ``the wonderful girl I love,'' and then there's a long shot of the interior, with customers seated at their tables like mourners at a wake. Lighting is used to highlight Ilona at her perch in the back of the shot, and after she seats a customer, there's a zoom in to her sad, thoughtful face.

There's a crisis in the kitchen. The cook is drunk again and brandishing a knife. After an offscreen struggle, the headwaiter returns to view with a bleeding wrist. Then Ilona disappears from the screen, there is a loud thud, she returns, and then we see the chef again, disconsolate. Kaurismaki loves to keep the action offscreen and focus on the reaction shots.

After closing, Ilona boards a streetcar and kisses the driver--her husband, Lauri (Kari Vaeaenaenen). At home, he covers her eyes to spring a surprise: a new TV set, bought on time. Of course they can't afford it (you can sense that in the haunted way they look at it), but as they sit side by side on a couch that's too small, we feel curious tenderness for them.

The couch is too small because Kaurismaki insists on bargain-basement sets; he wants his characters to always seem a little too large for their rooms and furniture, and the result is cartoonlike. Consider Ilona's interview with an employment agency; the interviewer's chair squeaks loudly as he confronts her across a desk that seems scaled for a grade-school classroom.

One misfortune follows another. The restaurant closes. The husband loses his job by drawing the wrong card in an office lottery. Ilona gets another job, in a restaurant where the owner is a tax cheat. Desperate to keep up appearances, she calls each order loudly into the kitchen before sneaking around a corner to cook it herself. The cook from the former restaurant appears, announcing, ``I am on a journey to the end of vodka.'' And then, improbably, there is a happy ending, which I will not reveal except to observe that it involves a reservation for 30 from the perfectly titled Helsinki Workers' Wrestlers.

Like Godard, Jarmusch and Mark Rappaport, Kaurismaki pays great attention to the frame around his characters. Their costumes, their props, their sets and the colors all conspire to make each shot look deliberately composed, as if we're being asked to contemplate people trapped by, and defined by, their environment. Ilona always seems self-conscious, as if she's posing for her photo. There's a shot at a time when things are going badly; she stands next to the bookcases they've bought on credit, and her face remains impassive--but her earrings vibrate, and that's the giveaway that she's trembling.

Kaurismaki himself is a jovial, self-deprecating sort, reportedly hard-drinking; he said once that he doesn't move his camera a lot because ``that's a nuisance when you have a hangover'' (actually, his setups show infinite thought and patience). ``I'm just a medium class of director,'' he told Jonathan Romney of Sight & Sound magazine. ``I may never make a masterpiece, but if I make many quite good films, together they're something.'' That statement, which describes many of the most successful directors working today, would never be made by any of them; that Kaurismaki can look at his work so objectively helps to explain why it has such a dry, deadpan appeal.

Drifing Clouds Recommends: "Drifting Clouds"

 

I named my film group after this masterpiece by Aki Kaurismaki, about the triumph of the human spirit.

 

 

 

Drifting Clouds

 

 

BY ROGER EBERT / July 10, 1998

 

 

Cast & Credits
Ilona: Kati Outinen
Lauri: Kari Vaeaenaenen
Melartin: Sakari Kuosmanen
Pianist: Shelley Fisher
Tax Inspector: Tero Jartti

Written And Directed By Aki Kaurismaki. Running Time: 96 Minutes. Not Rated (Mature Themes, No Objectionable Material).

 

 

 

Aki Kaurismaki is the 40-ish Finnish director of strange and quirky comedies, in which little people are crushed by vast economic systems, but they keep on truckin'. In ``Drifting Clouds,'' a woman loses her job at a bankrupt restaurant, her husband is laid off by the transport system, their TV is repossessed, she pays her savings to an employment agency for another job, she isn't paid, and when her husband tries to collect he gets beaten up. But there's a happy ending.

Kaurismaki has enormous love for these characters. He embraces their comic pathos, and rejoices that they do not surrender. It's all done with such subtle irony that critics use words like ``minimalist'' to describe him--even though his screen is saturated with images and ideas, and true minimalism is more easily seen in something like ``Armageddon,'' which has half an idea, and spreads it thinly over 144 minutes.

The heroine of ``Drifting Clouds'' is Ilona (Kati Outinen), a wan, sweet blond with a dour expression who works as the manager of a failing restaurant. The movie opens with a pianist singing of ``the wonderful girl I love,'' and then there's a long shot of the interior, with customers seated at their tables like mourners at a wake. Lighting is used to highlight Ilona at her perch in the back of the shot, and after she seats a customer, there's a zoom in to her sad, thoughtful face.

There's a crisis in the kitchen. The cook is drunk again and brandishing a knife. After an offscreen struggle, the headwaiter returns to view with a bleeding wrist. Then Ilona disappears from the screen, there is a loud thud, she returns, and then we see the chef again, disconsolate. Kaurismaki loves to keep the action offscreen and focus on the reaction shots.

After closing, Ilona boards a streetcar and kisses the driver--her husband, Lauri (Kari Vaeaenaenen). At home, he covers her eyes to spring a surprise: a new TV set, bought on time. Of course they can't afford it (you can sense that in the haunted way they look at it), but as they sit side by side on a couch that's too small, we feel curious tenderness for them.

The couch is too small because Kaurismaki insists on bargain-basement sets; he wants his characters to always seem a little too large for their rooms and furniture, and the result is cartoonlike. Consider Ilona's interview with an employment agency; the interviewer's chair squeaks loudly as he confronts her across a desk that seems scaled for a grade-school classroom.

One misfortune follows another. The restaurant closes. The husband loses his job by drawing the wrong card in an office lottery. Ilona gets another job, in a restaurant where the owner is a tax cheat. Desperate to keep up appearances, she calls each order loudly into the kitchen before sneaking around a corner to cook it herself. The cook from the former restaurant appears, announcing, ``I am on a journey to the end of vodka.'' And then, improbably, there is a happy ending, which I will not reveal except to observe that it involves a reservation for 30 from the perfectly titled Helsinki Workers' Wrestlers.

Like Godard, Jarmusch and Mark Rappaport, Kaurismaki pays great attention to the frame around his characters. Their costumes, their props, their sets and the colors all conspire to make each shot look deliberately composed, as if we're being asked to contemplate people trapped by, and defined by, their environment. Ilona always seems self-conscious, as if she's posing for her photo. There's a shot at a time when things are going badly; she stands next to the bookcases they've bought on credit, and her face remains impassive--but her earrings vibrate, and that's the giveaway that she's trembling.

Kaurismaki himself is a jovial, self-deprecating sort, reportedly hard-drinking; he said once that he doesn't move his camera a lot because ``that's a nuisance when you have a hangover'' (actually, his setups show infinite thought and patience). ``I'm just a medium class of director,'' he told Jonathan Romney of Sight & Sound magazine. ``I may never make a masterpiece, but if I make many quite good films, together they're something.'' That statement, which describes many of the most successful directors working today, would never be made by any of them; that Kaurismaki can look at his work so objectively helps to explain why it has such a dry, deadpan appeal.

Tuesday, 16 November 2010

Aki Kaurismaki at Senses Of Cinema

Aki Kaurismaki

by Lana Wilson

Lana Wilson is the Film Programmer for the Great Neck Arts Center and its Furman Film Series. She also handles film programming, publications, and publicity for Performa, the New York biennial of new visual art performance.

b. 4 April 1957, Orimattila, Finland

Filmography
Select Bibliography
Web Resources

Two Finns are in a bar. After hours of silence, one man raises his glass to the other and says, “Cheers.” The other man snaps back, “I didn’t come here for conversation.”

The world of Aki Kaurismäki undoubtedly owes much to the deadpan mien of his homeland, as evidenced in this traditional Finnish joke, but is also remarkably distinctive, instantly identifiable by a single frame from almost any of his films. The uncommon union he forges between social realism and visual stylization, and between dry comedy and warm-hearted humanism, is something Kaurismäki’s actors refer to as “Akiland”, and what American critics delicately describe as “an acquired taste” (1).

Kaurismäki is, in fact, almost single-handedly responsible for rejuvenating the failing Finnish film industry in the 1980s with a series of highly original comedies made with his brother Mika. Over the past twenty years, Kaurismäki has become one of the pre-eminent auteurs of international art cinema, fusing minimalism and melodrama to poignantly depict the hardships of Finland’s blue-collar class. His films, however, are never didactic. Instead, they make a joke out of the extremity of the economic situations they depict, mining the cruelty of the unemployment officer or the bank bureaucrat for black comedy. So, while social criticism is always present, it is couched in humour to soften the blow. The elegant compositions and rich colour design further cloak the bleak reality faced by Kaurismäki’s characters in a dreamy visual beauty (that owes much to Kaurismäki’s long-time cinematographer, Timo Salminen), heightening the sense of
otherworldliness that is so unique to his work. Kaurismäki’s influence on other filmmakers is immediately evident in the output of several of his contemporaries – particularly those inclined toward deadpan stylistics, such as Jim Jarmusch, Tsai Ming-Liang and Corneliu Porumboiu – and over the past decade, most films by other directors coming out of Finland fall noticeably under Kaurismäki’s shadow.

Straight Out of Finland

In many ways, Finland is a country that doesn’t quite fit in. It is situated between East and West both geographically and culturally, yet remains somewhat apart from both. The Finnish language, for example, bears no resemblance to any of the Germanic Scandinavian languages, and is also nothing like Russian; its closest (but still distant) relative is actually Hungarian. The country’s government hovers somewhere between capitalism and socialism; although 20 percent of Finns are likely to vote Communist in an election, the country’s economy is moving rapidly towards increased capitalism, which has caused countless economic and social problems that provide the basis for the working-class stories told in Kaurismäki’s films. (2)

Most people know little about Finland, but there seems to be a measure of truth in some of the stereotypes. For instance, many Finns drink heavily; Finnish film historian Peter Cowie writes that alcohol is a necessity to many citizens because it is “a shield against the harsh climate, the solitude, and the press of modern existence” (3). Kaurismäki is no exception. He drank “whiskey, white wine, and a Bloody Mary in the 40 minutes I spent with him” (4), one reporter wrote. He occasionally enjoys unsettling people by measuring time in terms of alcohol consumed (e.g., “when I was young: 10,000 pints ago” (5)). But at the same time, as Cowie notes, “in Finland an intoxicated man may look sullen where his Mediterranean counterpart will be singing with joy” (6).

Are Finns depressed? They live in a huge country with a tiny population, sparsely distributed across a huge land mass, and even in urban areas like Helsinki the city centres are “empty after dusk has fallen” (7) – which, in the winter, can be as early as 3pm. The suicide rate in Finland is nearly double that of the United States. Over 20 percent of the country’s population lives in overcrowded conditions. These facts translate into equally dire statistics for Finland’s film industry – the nation of 5.2 million has only 338 movie theatres, and the average person goes to a movie one or maybe two times per year (far less than the average American, who goes to the cinema nearly six times a year). (8) In the 1980s, the Finnish film industry was practically nonexistent – but then arrived Mika Kaurismäki and his little brother, Aki.

The Brothers Kaurismäki

In their youth, the Kaurismäki brothers were insatiable cinéphiles and watched five or six films every day at the Finnish Film Archive, where they especially admired Jean-Luc Godard, Yasujiro Ozu and American film noir. (9) Mika studied film in Munich, but Aki was rejected by the Finnish film school “because he was considered to be too cynical” (10). Aki began a media studies program at the University of Tampere, but soon quit “to work ‘in real life,’ taking ‘honest jobs’ such as postman and dishwasher” (11). In 1980, the brothers created their own film company, Villealfa, named for Godard’s Alphaville: une étrange aventure de Lemmy Caution (1965), and began rapidly making films together.

Generally, Aki wrote the screenplay and Mika directed; this was the case for two of their early efforts, Valehtelija (The Liar, 1981) and Arvottomat (The Worthless, 1982), in which Aki also starred. In between these two films, the brothers co-directed a rock documentary, Saimaa-ilmiö (The Saimaa Gesture, 1981), and soon after they would make two more feature films together: Klaani: Tarina Sammakoitten suvusta (The Clan Tale of Frogs, 1984) and Rosso (1985). Mika is generally regarded as a very good director, with the ability to work in a variety of genres and a strong sense of classical Hollywood storytelling; Aki, whose later solo work is notable for its clever takes on popular genres and riffs on Hollywood conventions, clearly learned a lot from his brother, but then aimed his ideas toward less commercial ends.

The films the Kaurismäki brothers made together in the early 1980s gave a terrific burst of revitalization to the floundering Finnish film industry – since that decade began, the Kaurismäki brothers have been responsible for an astonishing twenty percent of all Finnish films. (12) Although Mika continued making successful films throughout the rest of the 1980s and into the present, it was when Aki began to direct his own scripts that he had the chance to hone the remarkably original style that would soon draw international attention.

Anti-Art Cinema

In 1983, Aki Kaurismäki made his directorial debut with an adaptation of Fyodor Dostoyevsky’s Prestuplenie I nakazanie (Crime and Punishment), reset in contemporary Helsinki, featuring a law-school dropout-turned-slaughterhouse-worker as Raskolnikov. Kaurismäki says he decided to make a film version of the imposing Dostoyevsky novel because,

[Alfred] Hitchcock said he would never be able to touch that book, and I thought, ‘OK, I’ll show you, old man.’ Later I realized that he was right. It was not my style, but I had no style then – it came later. (13)

The protagonist of a Kaurismäki film is almost always the same character: a lonely, working-class underdog of few words in search of love and a steady job. In a way, Raskolnikov seems like a logical point of reference for beginning a career devoted to sympathizing with these “loser” characters. Kaurismäki himself recognizes that Rikos ja rangaistus (Crime and Punishment) was

the first time I started to develop the loser character Nikander [the protagonist of Kaurismäki’s Varjoja paratiisissa (Shadows in Paradise, 1986)]. Right up to [Pidä huivista kiinni, Tatjana (Take Care of Your Scarf, Tatiana, 1994)] he’s the same character. (14)

The first shot of Crime and Punishment – a close-up of a butcher’s cleaver smashing a bug on the cutting board and then continuing to chop meat – is further evidence of how Kaurismäki’s worldview – of small, defenceless individuals being crushed by large and uncaring forces beyond their control – was present from the start.

Also there from the beginning was Kaurismäki’s ridicule of the seriousness and inscrutability of the art house tradition. After Crime and Punishment, which explicitly mocked the pretensions of highbrow literary adaptations, Kaurismäki decided to try to make “the lousiest film ever made” (15) – and so Calamari Union (1985) was born. The absurd premise of this film – in which ten ordinary men, all named Frank, try, unsuccessfully, to walk from one end of Helsinki to the other without getting killed – mocks the metaphysical implications traditionally associated with the episodic plotlines and mundane narrative detailing found in the work of art cinema masters like Michelangelo Antonioni and Ingmar Bergman. The film’s most frequently noted sketch involves the Franks (who, like many Kaurismäki characters, are fans of large black sunglasses) performing an impromptu rock number at a club with lyrics such as “Bad boys are coming to break your
toys” (16) – and so begins the Kaurismäki tradition of featuring rock-and-roll concerts in nearly every film. Unlikely rock band as crucial narrative element and a deep-seated delight in tweaking the tenets of art cinema would both be taken even further in the late ’80s and early ’90s with Kaurismäki’s Leningrad Cowboys films. Ironically, by this point Kaurismäki would become the darling of the contemporary art cinema establishment, a cult favourite among film festival-goers around the world.

Soon after Kaurismäki made another literary adaptation, Hamlet liikemaailmassa (Hamlet Goes Business, 1987), that locates the classic tragedy in the contemporary world of big business. After his father’s death, Hamlet (Pirkka-Pekka Petelius) holds a majority of stock in his family’s corporation and decides to go into manufacturing rubber ducks. A Shakespearean power struggle ensues, with absurdist comedy layered on top. The film is shot in gorgeous black-and-white tableaux with an astute B-movie sensibility: dark shadows, bright lights, and occasional bursts of histrionic music. As with Crime and Punishment, Hamlet Goes Business – an unexpected hit at the 1988 Berlin Film Festival – uses comedy to undermine the pretensions of the literary adaptation genre, but is also a scathing indictment of the hypocrisy of the wealthy and powerful.

The Working-class Trilogy

In 1986, Kaurismäki made Varjoja paratiisissa (Shadows in Paradise), the first film in his “Working-class Trilogy” (aka “Proletariat Trilogy”). With this film, Kaurismäki established the storyline that he would revisit time and time again over the years to follow: the plight of a virtuous, inexpressive outsider who loses everything he has, meets the love of his life, works very hard, and, after a series of heartbreaking events, escapes to freedom – which usually lies anywhere outside Finland.

Nikkander, a lonely garbage truck driver (played by Kaurismäki’s best friend and favourite leading man, Matti Pellonpää), falls in love with Ilona Rajamäki, a shy supermarket check-out girl (played by Kaurismäki’s most frequent leading lady, Kati Outinen). After watching Nikkander eat dinner by himself at home, sadly gazing out the window, and then being treated to the equally heartbreaking display of Ilona sitting by herself at a nightclub, the only woman there who is not invited to dance, it is clear that these two belong together.

From this point forward, Shadows in Paradise deconstructs the romantic comedy. When Ilona steals from her corrupt boss in retaliation for unfairly firing her, Nikander helps her out of the resulting jam. The relationship that ensues, however, spirals quickly downward, reaching its climax during Nikkander’s English-language class, at which the phrase of the day is, “It’s funny. It’s very funny. And it’s a lot of fun, too, being in love.” These words – which also seem to capture a fragment of Kaurismäki’s worldview – inspire Nikkonen to run out of the school, confront Ilona at her new job and perform his version of the quintessential romantic comedy finale – sweeping the heroine off her feet. “You’re coming with me”, he announces. “Where?”, Ilona asks. “On a honeymoon. You can’t make it on your own.” That’s that, and the couple happily escapes to Estonia. As with the simplicity of the set-up, the efficiency of the
resolution is so exaggerated, it’s hilarious.

Ariel (1988), the second instalment of Kaurismäki’s Working-class Trilogy, and the first of his films to be successfully released across Europe, tells the tale of Taisto Kasurinen (Turo Pajala), an unemployed miner who travels from the Laplands to Helsinki to find work. There he gets mugged, falls in love with a single mother who works four jobs (while he, ironically, still cannot find one for himself) and is then thrown in jail for trying to beat up the thief who had mugged him. Eventually, the couple escapes to Mexico.

Ariel firmly established the iconography that Kaurismäki would revisit again and again in his later films: a mixture of seediness and nostalgia featuring jukeboxes, Cadillacs, dive bars, stray dogs, and Ray Bans. But Ariel’s style is more free-wheeling in cinematic references than Kaurismäki’s later, more strictly minimalist work. It undermines dozens of conventions from B-movie genres: in a gaolbreak scene, Taisto and cellmate Mikkonen (Matti Pellonpää) knock out the prison guard, but pause to place a pillow under his head before escaping, and, in prison, Mikkonen turns the emotional soliloquy of a wrongfully convicted man into one of existential boredom: “I’m innocent … in God’s eyes at least. In a way I did kill him, but the truth is I didn’t. Whatever – he died and I was sent here.” The movie’s “climactic” bank heist misses the real action as the camera dramatically swoops alongside the pair of criminals running to the
front door with guns drawn, then the camera halts, patiently observes the exterior of the bank, and finally reverses its movement once the pair comes running outside with the money. It left the actual heist entirely off-screen. The crime caper, the prison drama, and the film noir – these are a few genres among many that are picked up, turned around, and quickly discarded by Kaurismäki in the span of about 70 minutes.

Tulitikkutehtaan tyttö (The Match Factory Girl, 1990) is one of Kaurismäki’s darkest films, but it is also one of his funniest. Exploited by her parents and ignored by society, lonely factory worker Iiris (Kati Outinen) becomes pregnant in a one-night stand. After being scorned by the father of the child and cast out by her own parents, Iiris decides to fight back for the first time in her life, using rat poison to coldly exact her well-deserved revenge. It is a bleak, harsh story, and visualized accordingly: icy blue lighting fills the house Iris shares with her parents, and the cinematography (by Kaurismäki’s regular director of photography, the extraordinarily versatile Timo Salminen) is crisply composed and sharply focused. The film opens with a rhythmic, elegantly edited sequence showing the progression of a matchbox being assembled by industrial machines, ending with a close shot of Iiris’ hands, mechanically examining each completed box
that passes by her post.

In some ways, Iris resembles the put-upon heroine of Robert Bresson’s Mouchette (1967), but in that film – like many others by Bresson, who was one of Kaurismäki’s greatest heroes – the motivations of the main character are unclear. Iiris’ feelings, on the other hand, are almost transparent. This is partially thanks to the privileged information we’re given about her depressing situation at the film’s outset, but it is also a result of the pared down æsthetic, which visually expresses the loneliness and solitude of Kaurismäki’s characters. While Bresson would have his actors (or, as he called them, “models”) repeat their lines over and over again, until they were drained of all emotion from the sheer dullness of repetition, Kaurismäki uses an opposite approach to get a similar effect: his actors do not know what their lines are until right before they speak them. Sometimes, he has them read the lines off cue cards. On the rare
occasions when Kaurismäki does give his actors a script in advance, it is prefaced by something like “The same sentences every morning without passion.” (17) And, although his actors say that Kaurismäki always shoots only one take, the director himself once admitted to an interviewer that he actually shoots the rehearsal and then pretends to the actors that he is shooting the first take. He does this because he wants them thinking as little as possible about “acting” and more about reading a line as simply as possible. The result is an impassive acting style that serves a double purpose: to mimic the uncaring capitalistic society looming over Kaurismäki’s films, and to work in comedic counterpoint to the frequently dramatic content of the dialogue itself.

Loser Goes to London

“Where I come from, we eat places like this for breakfast”, deadpans Henri Boulanger (Jean-Pierre Léaud) in I Hired A Contract Killer (1990). He is speaking to the dozens of bar patrons who fell silent when he walked into the room, and the threat is made even more unconvincing by the fact that it follows his polite order of a single ginger ale. Although it was technically made in between Kaurismäki’s two trilogies of working-class melodramas, I Hired A Contract Killer is actually very much a part of them in content and in form, fusing Bresson-style minimalism with the plot of a B-movie in overdrive. When we first see Henri, he has passed out at work, with his forehead flat on his desk and a telephone against his ear – apparently, his call was so boring he literally fell asleep. Lunchtime is a long, flat shot of workers gathered at a large table, talking and laughing loudly. At the far left edge of the frame, Henri is visible, sitting at a
separate table by himself and silently eating a sandwich. Every now and then, he looks over at his co-workers – even, at one point, offering an adorably tentative smile – but his presence goes entirely unnoticed, in a delicate balance of humour and poignancy that is quintessentially Kaurismäkian.

The premise of I Hired A Contract Killer is a clever twist on one of Hollywood’s favourite scenarios: a hit man out for blood. This time, the hero hires the hit man to kill himself. After being fired from his job, Henri decides to commit suicide, and first tries hanging himself, only to have the cheap rope break under his weight, and then tries sticking his head in the oven, but the local gas union suddenly decides to go on strike. This bad luck is pitifully funny, but also reflects Kaurismäki’s ever-present interest in larger economic realities. After these misfires, Henri hires a hit man to do the job for him. Just after closing the deal, Léaud falls in love with a woman selling roses on the street, and spends the rest of the film trying to escape the killer he arranged himself, culminating in an absurdly dedramatized “chase” scene marked by awkward pauses and actors slowly running from one side of the screen to the other. This finale, like
much of the film, intentionally exaggerates the clarity and efficiency of classical Hollywood filmmaking, creating unexpected comedy by flattening its traits to the barest minimum.

I Hired A Contract Killer is Kaurismäki’s only English-language film, and it was both set and shot in London. The glamorous location, however, didn’t get in the way of Kaurismäki’s unchanging vision of working-class life, for all we see of the city are poor neighbourhoods of dilapidated buildings and empty cafés. As in the vast majority of Kaurismäki’s films, which are set in the working-class fringes of Helsinki or other cities, the most typical elements of an urban setting – people, cars, noise, tall buildings, modern technology – are drained from the landscape. Even though Finland, home of Nokia, has one of the world’s densest concentrations of mobile phones, they are never seen in Kaurismäki’s films. Instead, an entire dormitory is shown sharing a single landline. Additionally, there are no computers whatsoever – only typewriters – and Kaurismäki will only film cars made before 1962 (preferably Cadillacs) because modern
cars, in his opinion, are “ugly and have no personality” (18). In his Finnish-language films, the dialogue his characters speak is a very formal, literary version of the language that most Finns don’t use anymore. And, most conspicuously, the music that permeates the homes and businesses of his characters seems to be from another time, coming from old jukeboxes and vintage records. The films’ excellent soundtracks are full of melancholy Finnish tango, often seen performed live at a dance hall or dive bar, and old-time American music: blues, rockabilly, early punk rock. At one point in I Hired A Contract Killer, Henri stumbles into a cafe where Joe Strummer of the Clash is performing the rarity, “Burning Lights”. As a result of all this, Kaurismäki’s work appears to be set in a strange past era – an archaic world, vaguely familiar, but with an undeniably dreamlike quality.

The Leningrad Cowboys

Leningrad Cowboys Go America (1989) unexpectedly became Kaurismäki’s biggest hit yet – and led to a series of films about this fictitious polka/rock-and-roll band from the Laplands (played by actual Finnish rock band, The Sleepy Sleepers). Leningrad Cowboys sport pointy-toed shoes and outrageous pompadour hairdos, performing spirited but hilariously atrocious covers of American rock songs from the 1950s and ’60s. Because their music is so terrible, a record executive suggests that they go to America (“They’ll listen to anything there!”) to make it as rock stars. In New York, they manage to book their first gig: a wedding in Mexico. This sends them on a road trip through the Deep South during which their bassist dies (and is put on ice in the trunk), their conniving manager hides beer from them, and regrettable renditions of “Born to Be Wild” and “Tequila” are performed at any club that will have them. They eventually arrive at the
wedding, revive the dead bassist with a shot of tequila, and make it onto the Mexican Top Ten charts.

Kaurismäki himself deemed Leningrad Cowboys Go America “the worst film in the history of cinema, unless you count Sylvester Stallone’s films” (19). In magazine interviews, Kaurismäki gave ludicrous justifications for the film (“my film is based on a cautionary vision of the changes that have taken place in the USSR and in Eastern Europe as well as the growth of migration that followed” (20)) as part of what Peter Von Bagh has called part of the “total performance” (21) of Leningrad Cowboys. After the film became a cult hit across Europe, Leningrad Cowboys also began performing live, further adding to the confusion about their provenance. In 1994, Kaurismäki made a string of black-and-white music videos of the Cowboys followed by two feature-length films. One of these is the documentary, Total Balalaika Show (1994), which records a 1993 concert featuring Leningrad Cowboys alongside Russia’s 100-member Alexandrov Red Army Ensemble. The
concert was held in Helsinki’s Senate Square, attended by 70,000 people, and featured the Cowboys performing “Happy Together” and “Knockin’ On Heaven’s Door” with the help of the Red Army Choir and a group of women performing traditional Russian folk dances. Then, Leningrad Cowboys Meet Moses (1994) followed the band on another road trip guided by their former manager, who proclaims to be Moses leading them to the Promised Land – which, as it turns out, is Siberia.

As with Calamari Union, the minimalist premise of the Leningrad Cowboys films is part of the joke. It’s already absurd that these men are wandering around Mexico playing accordions in wannabe-Elvis outfits, but it is even more absurd that audiences – particularly the arthouse set – are paying money to watch a movie about them.

Mid-Career Melodramas

In 1991, Aki and Mika Kaurismäki each started their own separate production companies – Sputnik Oy and Marianna Films, respectively – but planned overlapping shooting schedules so that they could share much of the same crew, and continued to use Villealfa to produce films by other Finnish directors. The first film produced by Sputnik Oy was La Vie de bohème (1992), a black-and-white adaptation of the early 19th century Henri Murger novel, which depicts the friendship of three impressively untalented artists, including an artist who paints enormous odes to his pet sheepdog and a musician whose new piano work is a sonata entitled Traffic Jam.

La Vie de bohème was made in Paris with the actors speaking French – even though the majority of the cast was Finnish. As one might expect, this has the effect of line readings that are even more wooden and awkward than is usually the case in Kaurismäki’s films, a quality that must have thrilled him. Throughout La Vie de bohème, the novel’s romanticism is undercut by the ridiculousness of the characters waxing intellectual in their impoverished circumstances, which then makes the few moments of seriousness (such as the final scene, in which Rodolfo’s lover dies) refreshing and surprisingly emotional in contrast.

In 1994 – the same year he released Leningrad Cowboys Meet Moses and Total Balalaika Show – Kaurismäki also made Pidä huivista kiini, Tatjana (Take Care of Your Scarf, Tatjana), a ’60s road comedy about two middle-aged men in a vintage Cadillac (complete with built-in record player) who pick up two women – an Estonian and a Russian – and give them a ride to the Tallinn ferry. The film encapsulates Kaurismäki’s attitudes towards three countries with historically strong presences in Finland: consciousness of Russia’s enormous influence, idealization of Estonia as place to escape into paradise and love of American popular culture.

Kaurismäki tackled an altogether different kind of genre in his silent, black-and-white Juha (1999), adapted from a famous Finnish tragedy written by Juhani Aho in 1911. The story is a classic love triangle, in which the plain wife of a simple-minded farmer falls in love with a smooth-talking stranger from the city. Kaurismäki has a great love for silent cinema and frequently criticizes the excessive dialogue in contemporary films (which comes as no surprise in light of his own close-lipped work), so it seems natural for him to want to make a silent film. As he wrote in the director’s notes for Juha:

We can never again make films like Broken Blossoms [or the Yellow Man and the Girl, D. W. Griffith, 1919], Sunrise[: A Song of Two Humans, F. W. Murnau, 1927], or Queen Kelly [Erich von Stronheim, 1929], because since film started to gamble with mumbling and all that ‘hoochie coochie’ and fancy words, stories have lost their purity, cinema its essence: innocence. (22)

The Loser Trilogy

In the 1990s, Finland began to suffer a severe economic crisis. A major recession hit the northern, industrial part of Finland, leading to several years in which about half a million people were without jobs. Although many of his previous films directly addressed Finland’s floundering economy, when the recession struck Kaurismäki became particularly concerned: “If I didn’t make a film about unemployment now I wouldn’t have the nerve to look at my face in the mirror.” (23) The result was 1996’s Kauas pilvet karkaavat (Drifting Clouds), the first film of Kaurismäki’s “Loser Trilogy” (aka “Finland Trilogy”), which, along with the Working-class Trilogy, contains the most representative and important work of his career.

Like the Working-class Trilogy, the films in the Loser Trilogy were minimalist comedies. But, although a few of Kaurismäki’s previous films – most notably The Match Factory Girl – were melodramas, Drifting Clouds and the two films that followed marked a time of refined focus for Kaurismäki, who was now more invested than ever in showing the economic hardships and social obstacles facing working-class Finns with compassion and even seriousness, in a style indebted to the warm humanism of Frank Capra. And, while the world encountered by his characters was bleaker than ever, the cinematography grew even more luminous in response, taking his trademark saturated colours, velvety shadows and glowing lights to dazzling new heights.

Drifting Clouds follows a husband and wife, Lauri (Kari Väänänen) and Ilona (Kati Outinen), who lose their jobs as tram-driver and head waitress. The economic pressures of unemployment lead to a marital crisis. Although all the cards seemed stacked against the couple, a group effort eventually leads to the successful opening of a new eatery, Restaurant Work, and, indeed, Kaurismäki describes Drifting Clouds as a tribute to sisu, or “the peculiarly Finnish quality that translates roughly as perseverance” (24).

The film’s rich colour design recalls Douglas Sirk’s 1950s weepies and helps to fill in the emotional blanks left by the sparse dialogue. For instance, when Lauri and Ilona’s new television set is repossessed, the couple is shown in a long-shot, standing completely still as two men remove the television. They say nothing, but the entire living room is emblazoned in a deep royal blue, with a bright scarlet sofa in the centre. Visually, the image throbs. This, and the many other shots like it, are largely a testament to Kaurismäki’s outstanding cinematographer, Timo Salminen, who has shot every one of his films. Kaurismäki says that he composes the images but gives Salminen complete control over lighting; this division of labour might help to account for the almost magical tension between the down-to-earth settings and the ethereal cinematography that they are rendered in. The æsthetic might vary from one film to another – ranging from the
expressionistic chiaroscuro of Hamlet Goes Business to the lyrical natural landscapes in moments of Ariel, and from the cold industrial scenery of The Match Factory Girl to the hallucinatory primary colours of Drifting Clouds – but Salminen’s remarkable range of styles all create a world in which practical reality is visually amplified in some way.

Kaurismäki’s visual and storytelling abilities reached their apex with 2002’s Mies vailla menneisyyttä (The Man Without a Past), a love story between two adorably innocent characters set against a grim backdrop of crime and impoverishment. The film, the second in his Loser Trilogy, was met with worldwide acclaim, winning the Grand Prix at the Cannes Film Festival and earning an Oscar nomination for Best Foreign Language Film. (25)

A man (Markku Peltola) arrives via train in an anonymous city and is immediately mugged and beaten. He regains consciousness only to find that he has amnesia and so is forced to start his life anew, forging a makeshift home in a container park and falling in love with the Salvation Army worker who helps him get back on his feet. In Kaurismäki’s words, “I wanted to make a film about homelessness without making it so socially declaring. […] The idea of a man without memory, without a past, made it more like a B movie.” (26)

Kaurismäki paints the bureaucratic government as oppressors of the working class through deadpan caricatures that are very funny, but at the same time frighteningly close to reality, suggesting that the inequality of Finnish society borders on the absurd. What kind of society rewards greed instead of work, the film asks, and forces its most ethical members into crime in order to do what is right when the government does wrong?

A more personal social challenge is confronted by the man’s love interest, Irma (Kati Outinen). Irma has a job, but faces another problem shared by many Finns, employed and unemployed alike: loneliness. In one key scene, Irma changes for bed, neatly hanging her Salvation Army uniform on her otherwise-empty clothes rack, and carefully placing a mat underneath the door crack to shut out the hallway light from the dingy women’s dormitory where she lives. Then, something entirely unexpected happens: she slowly turns her head to look almost directly at the camera, if to say to the audience, “This is what happens to the people you always ignore.”

After this jarring moment, there is a sudden shift in tone: Irma looks down at a small tape recorder on her bedside table and hits Play. The 1950s rock song “Do the Shake”, which instructs listeners to start dancing wildly, starts to play, and Irma proceeds to solemnly remove and fold her bathrobe. Maintaining her poker face, she casually throws the robe to the side, as though the music has inspired her to become somewhat reckless in her usual bedtime routine. She gets under the covers and looks hopefully toward the alarm clock on her nightstand as the song continues to play. This, as much as any single moment, epitomizes that unique co-existence of comedy and tragedy that is at the heart of Kaurismäki’s work.

As “Do the Shake” continues to play, the film cuts to a shot of the man sitting at the waterfront, then to the Helsinki skyline and then to several shots of homeless people sleeping on the streets, transforming “Do the Shake” into a much broader kind of commentary: connecting Irma to our hero as well as to Finland’s homeless population, extending the sympathy we feel toward her to all of the others who come after, and comparing the economic impoverishment of the country to the emotional isolation of one individual.

Despite all this sorrow, the film ultimately conveys an extraordinary hopefulness based on the fundamental goodness of the working class. In the end, the man survives thanks to others living in the container park community: homeless, jobless men and women whose generosity is thrown into greater relief by the fact that they have nothing of their own. This same hopefulness is expressed in their blossoming relationship between Irma and the man, which develops like a schoolyard romance between two Victorian ten-year-olds. After the man walks Irma home one night after work, she thanks him and the man responds by flatly exclaiming, “Look out!” “What?”, Irma asks. “There’s something in your eye”, announces the man, who then slowly leans forward and kisses her lightly on the cheek. Irma lowers her head in shame, and then looks back up at the man: “You stole a kiss.” “Forgive me”, he says, “I’m not a gentleman.” The exchange is
hilarious but also remarkably touching – another example of Kaurismäki’s ability to delicately balance irony and sentimentality in his magical, self-contained universe.

With the success of The Man Without a Past, Kaurismäki’s membership in the art cinema Hall of Fame that he had once so mercilessly mocked was fully established. After making short films as part of the Ten Years Older: The Trumpet (2002) and Visions of Europe (2004) omnibuses, “Dogs Have No Hell” and “Bico” respectively, Kaurismäki completed his Loser Trilogy with its final film, Laitakaupungin valot (Lights in the Dusk (2006). Like the two features that came before it, Lights is a working-class melodrama, shot in gorgeously saturated colours, but it is also much more melancholic than any of Kaurismäki’s previous work. Instead of playing comedy and tragedy off of one another, here he veers straight toward tragedy. The jokes are few and far between, and the environment is notably different. We enter the modern era for the first time, complete with highways, cellular phones and even computers – all things that had never before been seen in
Kaurismäki-land. But even without the filmmaker’s typical humour, Lights in the Dusk is still moving and visually rich, albeit with a more severe deadpan tone. After the femme fatale, Mirja (Maria Järvenhelmi), dumps our loser hero Koistinen (Janne Hyytiäinen), Koistinen sits in a restaurant, drinking an entire bottle of liquor as the famous Finnish tango artist Olavi Virta sings: “You will see not a tear / even when my heart is crying […] You will drink the bitter cup of broken dreams.” This song, which Kaurismäki has used more than any other in his films, encapsulates the emotional world of his characters, without them having to say a word.

For the 60th anniversary of the Cannes Film Festival, Kaurismäki was one of many prominent art cinema directors invited to make a three-minute film about movie theatres, Chacun son cinéma ou ce petit coup au coeur quand la lumière s’éteint et que le film commence (2007). Kaurismäki’s contribution, “La Fonderie”, is a gem of simplicity. A group of foundry employees silently finish their shifts, change clothes in the locker room and leave the factory. They file into a movie theatre and sit down to watch the show. A beam of light bursts from the projection booth, throwing the first film ever shown to a public audience – La Sortie des usines Lumière (Workers Leaving the Lumière Factory), made by the Lumière Brothers in 1895 – onto the screen. The film consists of a single shot of a crowd of workers excitedly running out of the factory gates at the end of a long day. Kaurismäki’s own workers, in a rare showing of emotion, laugh
themselves, as this film – like Kaurismäki’s own – has brought them hope.

Endnotes

Roger Ebert, “The Man Without a Past”, Chicago Sun-Times, Friday June 27 2003. 

Peter Cowie, Finnish Cinema (London: The Tantivy Press, 1976: 10). 

Ibid. 

Jonathan Romney, “‘Which Do I Like? None. All My Films Are Lousy’: Aki Kaurismäki Plays Down His Talent”, Independent on Sunday, Sunday January 19 2003. 

Sheila Johnston, “Film Location Report: Action Speaks Louder”, The Independent, Thursday May 3 1990. 

Cowie, Finnish Cinema, p. 10. 

Ibid. 

“Statistics Finland”, general publications, www.stat.fi, 2003, “Statistical Abstract of the United States”, US Census Bureau, www.census.gov/statab/www/, 2002, and “The Statistical Yearbook of the Economic Commission for Europe 2003: Trends in Europe and North America”, United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, www.unece.org/stats/trends/chll.html, 2003. 

“Aki Kaurismäki: Biography”, Lenin Imports, 2005. 

Peter von Bagh, “Finnish Cinema”, in Guide to the Cinema of Sweden and Finland (Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 2000). 

Per Olav Hernes, “Aki Kaurismäki Has Been Awarded the Nordic Council Filmprize”, Nordic Council-Nordic Council of Ministers, http://www.norden.org/webb/pressrelease/pressrelease.asp?lang=6&id=797, 29 October 2002. 

Hal Erickson, “Aki Kaurismäki”, All Movie Guide, 2005. 

Jonathan Romney, “The Kaurismäki Effect”, Sight and Sound, Vol. 7, No. 6 (1997), p. 13. 

Ibid, p. 13. 

Ibid. 

Damon Smith, “Filmmaker Is a Man of Constant Sorrow”, The Boston Globe, Wednesday 20 August 2003, D4. 

This quotation is by Manne Ojaniemi and appears at the beginning of the script for I Hired A Contract Killer. (Ibid.) 

Peter von Bagh, “The Comedy of Losers”, in Shadows in Paradise: Photographs from the Films by Aki Kaurismäki (Keuruu: Otava Printing Works, 1997), p. 7. 

Simon Louvish, “A Tale of Two Memories”, Sight and Sound, Vol. 12, No. 23 (2002), p. 24. 

Bagh, “The Comedy of Losers”, p. 16. 

Ibid. 

Romney, “Last Exit to Helsinki, Film Comment, Vol. 39, No. 2 (2003), pp. 43-6. 

Gordon Sander, “Romantic as a Caterpillar”, Financial Times, Saturday 28 December 2002, p. 7. 

Ibid. 

Kaurismäki did not attend the 2003 Oscar ceremony in protest over the war in Iraq. In a letter to the president of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, he wrote that the United States was “preparing a crime against humanity for the purpose of shameless economic interests”. But according to anonymous sources reportedly close to Kaurismäki, “[he] was never scheduled to attend the Oscars because the director cannot fly long distances without smoking”, so his protest might be best taken with a grain of salt. Ian Mohr, “Oscar Nominee Will Skip Show”, The Hollywood Reporter, Friday 21 March 2003.) Kaurismäki also boycotted the New York Film Festival the previous fall in protest of the U.S. failure to grant Iranian director Abbas Kiarostami a visa to attend the festival. A letter to the festival director read, in part, “Under the circumstances, I, too, am forced to cancel my participation – for if the government of the United
States does not want an Iranian, it will hardly have any use for a Finn. We do not even have the oil. But I would like to invite the American secretary of defense [Donald Rumsfeld] to see me in Finland. We could take a walk in the woods and pick mushrooms. That might calm him down.” (Charles Lyons and Jorn Rossing Jenson, “Inside Moves: Kaurismäki Takes a Stand”, Daily Variety, Tuesday 1 October 2002.) 

Dave Kehr, “Amnesia, without the Melodrama”, The New York Times, Sunday 6 April 2003, p. 13. 

Filmography

Feature Films

Rikos ja rangaistus (Crime and Punishment, 1983)

Calamari Union (1985)

Varjoja paratiisissa (Shadows in Paradise, 1986)

Hamlet liikemaailmassa (Hamlet Goes Business, 1987)

Ariel (1988)

Leningrad Cowboys Go America (1989)

Tulitikkutehtaan tyttö (The Match Factory Girl, 1990)

I Hired a Contract Killer (1990)

La Vie de bohème (1992)

Pidä huivista kiinni, Tatjana (Take Care of Your Scarf, Tatiana, 1994)

Leningrad Cowboys Meet Moses (1994)

Kauas pilvet karkaavat (Drifting Clouds, 1996)

Juha (1999)

Mies vailla menneisyyttä (The Man Without a Past, 2002)

Laitakaupungin valot (Lights in the Dusk, 2006)

Documentaries

Saimaa-ilmiö (Saimaa Gesture, 1981)

Total Balalaika Show (1994)

Short Films

Rocky VI (1986)

Thru the Wire (1987)

Rich Little Bitch (1987)

L.A. Woman (1987)

Those Were The Days (1991)

These Boots (1992)

Välittäjä (Employment Agent, 1996)

“Dogs Have No Hell” (2002) – episode in the collaborative film, Ten Minutes Older: The Trumpet

“Bico” (2004) – episode in the collaborative film, Visions of Europe

“La Fonderie” (2007) – episode in the collaborative film, Chacun son cinéma ou ce petit coup au coeur quand la lumière s’éteint et que le film commence

Films for Television

Likaiset kädet (You Filthy Hand, 1989)

*Please note: the above is strictly a filmography for Kaurismäki as a director. He has worked on dozens of other films as a writer, producer, actor, etc. For more information on his filmography in these other capacities, please see his page on IMDB (linked to below).

Select Bibliography

Michael Atkinson, “The Finnish Line”, Village Voice, Tuesday 15 April 2003, p. 116.

—–, “Whisky and Wry: Kaurismäki Goes America”, Village Voice, Tuesday 15 July 2003, p. 112.

Peter von Bagh, “The Comedy of Losers”, in Shadows in Paradise: Photographs from the Films by Aki Kaurismäki (Keuruu: Otava Printing Works, 1997).

—–, “Finnish Cinema”, in Guide to the Cinema of Sweden and Finland (Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 2000).

Stephanie Billen, “Dislocations of a Sentimental Man”, The Times, Thursday 14 February 1991.

Celestine Bohlen, “One Visa Problem Costs a Festival Two Filmmakers”, The New York Times, Tuesday 1 October 2002.

Roger Connah, K/K: A Couple of Finns and Some Donald Ducks: Cinema in Society (Helsinki: VAPK Pub., 1991).

Peter Cowie, Finnish Cinema (London: The Tantivy Press, 1976).

Rob Edelman, “Aki Kaurismäki”, in Directors, pp. 505-7.

Hal Erickson, “Aki Kaurismäki”, All Movie Guide, www.allmovie.com, 2005.

William Fisher, “Aki Kaurismäki Goes Business”, Sight and Sound, Vol. 58, No. 4 (1989), pp. 252-4.

Adam Hartzell, “It’s Cold out There: Thoughts on Take Care of Your Scarf, Tatjana”, The Film Journal, Vol. 1, No. 6 (2003).

Per Olav Hernes, “Aki Kaurismäki Has Been Awarded the Nordic Council Filmprize”, Nordic Council–Nordic Council of Ministers, http://www.norden.org/webb/pressrelease/pressrelease.asp?lang=6&id=797, 29 October 2002.

Charles Lyons Jensen and Jorn Rossing, “Inside Moves: Kaurismäki Takes a Stand”, Daily Variety, Tuesday 1 October 2002, p. 5.

Sheila Johnston, “Film Location Report: Action Speaks Louder”, The Independent, Thursday 3 May 1990, p. 17.

—–, “Of Fins and Finns; the Little Mermaid, the Match Factory, Silent Scream, the Salute of the Jugger”, The Independent, Thursday 18 October 1990, p. 15.

Aki Kaurismäki, “Robert Bresson – a Wolf”, in James Quandt (Ed.), Robert Bresson (Toronto: Cinematheque Ontario, 1998), pp. 561-2.

Dave Kehr, “Amnesia, without the Melodrama”, The New York Times, Sunday 6 April 2003, p. 13.

Simon Louvish, “A Tale of Two Memories”, Sight and Sound, Vol. 12, No. 23 (2002), pp. 24-6.

Ian Mohr, “Oscar Nominee Will Skip Show”, The Hollywood Reporter, Friday 21 March 2003.

Andrew Nestingen, “Why Nation? Globalization and National Culture in Finland, 1980-2001”, Ph.D, University of Washington, 2001.

Erich Mari Remarque, Shadows in Paradise: Photographs from the Films by Aki Kaurismäki (Keuruu: Otava Printing Works, 1997).

Jonathan Romney, “The Kaurismäki Effect”, Sight and Sound, Vol. 7, No. 6 (1997), pp. 10-14.

—–, “Last Exit to Helsinki”, Film Comment, Vol. 39, No. 2 (2003), pp. 43-6.

—–, “‘Which Do I Like? None. All My Films Are Lousy’: Aki Kaurismäki Plays Down His Talent”, Independent on Sunday, Sunday January 19 2003, p. 7.

Gordon Sander, “Romantic as a Caterpillar”, Financial Times, Saturday 28 December 2002, p. 7.

Damon Smith, “Filmmaker Is a Man of Constant Sorrow”, The Boston Globe, Wednesday 20 August 2003, D4.

Andrew Spooner, “Where the Stars Don’t Come Out: The Midnight Sun Film Festival Is All About Tangos, Tears, and Storytelling”, The Independent, Friday 30 June 2000, p. 11.

John Whitley, “Film Makers on Film: Aki Kaurismäki on Jean Vigo’s L’Atalante (1934)”, The Daily Telegraph, Sunday 18 January 2003, p. 14.

“Aki Kaurismäki: Biography”, Lenin Imports, 2005.

“Aki Kaurismäki named as New Academician of Art”, YLE, 22 May 2008.

“Finland’s Buster Keaton. Don’t Say a Word”, The Economist, 17 January 1998, p. 17.

Web Resources

“Siunattu teknologia – The Kaurismäki Web Site”

“Orimattilan Kirjasto – Aki Kaurismäki presented by Orimattila Town Library”

IMDB biography

IMDB main page

Wikipedia page

Click here to buy Aki Kaurismäki DVDs an