unflinching idealism ... since 1997 archivessitemapabouthelpfeedback
ideas, identities and interactions
  • Home
  • InFocus
  • Themes
  • Columns
  • Articles
  • Fiction
  • iLogs
  • Gallery
  • Unplugged
  • Writers
  • Interactors
  • Tags
Sign in | Join Chowk
web chowk
« August 2008 »
SMTWTFS
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 2930
31

Recently by ext-a-see

  • Transcendent
  • In eternity I traveled....
  • Take My Eyes - - not my right to live!
  • The first bout of Bergmania
  • Trivia of an unfinished walk..

iLog Categories

  • All
  • Personal
  • Fiction
  • Poetry
  • Travel
  • Work
  • Sports
  • Books
  • Movies
  • Music
  • Philosophy
  • Politics
  • Humor
  • Religion
  • Chowk
  • Other
  • ext-a-see
  • Intro & Favorites
  • iLogs
  • Gallery
  • Interacts

Take My Eyes - - not my right to live!

Posted: Jul 15, 2008 Tue 09:06 am     Views: 335    Interacts: 26

“Take my eyes” ( Te Doy Mis Ojos -2003) is not merely a film. It’s a statement. This somber drama puts forward a pertinent problem of domestic violence to its audiences. The story speaks of a battered wife Pilar (Laia Marull) who escapes from her abusive husband Antonio (Luis Tosar) one night after nine years of marriage, taking her son with her. She finds a job as a museum guide and starts staying with her sister Ana (Candela Pena). Antonio however, comes after her, promising to change, and succeeds eventually in talking her back into their home. Together the couple starts gathering bits and pieces of their broken marriage, which becomes a self – recognizing exercise for both of them.

This relatively simple storyline, however, is compensated by the eloquent screenplay and the beautiful portrayal of the characters in it.

Laia Marull portrays the delicate Pilar, so unsure of herself at first, terrified of her husband, yet loving him in a compelled, “’till death do us part” way. Gradually as she takes on a job for herself, her lack of self esteem and guilt for not making her marriage work changes to confidence, and assurance. Yet, she continues loving Antonio with a striking tenderness. Even at her moments of despair, Pilar shows a marked determination, which sets her apart. Everything she depicts in this character of a victim of domestic abuse comes alive, be it terror, resignation, melancholia or uncertainty. But what makes her character special, is her strength to move on, even after utter failures in her life, to be able to stand up again from her falls and walk forward. In one of the final moments of the film where she reports her husband to the police, she just says” He broke everything. Everything.” She is most beautiful at the moment, in her sorrow, yet self realization and determination. This performance is a testimonial to the immense talent of this actress.

Luis Tosar who plays the husband in this movie, comes across as the abusive terrorizing husband, but wait! He is not only that. He is also a man, who loves his wife and family. He is also a man frustrated with his own career, his inability to manage his own anger. He is also a man without a single relaxed moment in his whole life. Overall, this character has so may contrasting traits to itself, that it is almost impossible to recognize who he truly is. Realizing his own volatile nature Antonio goes to therapy, yet, cannot get rid of his patriarchal views about marriage and relationships. He literally begs Pilar to come home after she first leaves, yet when she does come back, he doesn’t stop being moody and irrational with her. He continues loving her in an impassioned way, but never really explains to her where his anger comes from. Through his sessions in therapy he comes across as an insecure yet cruel man, who can’t get past his doubts about his own insufficiency. When the therapist asks him the real reason of getting angry over his wife’s new job, he blurts out “what if she falls in love with one such museum going guys? Why would she stay with me? What can I give her? A shitty salary? A shitty apartment?” His anger comes from his fear, his fear, from his own inadequacy. Yet his anger escalates to a full blown rage, where he refuses to see every simple reason. He terrorizes the woman he loves most and then brings gifts to pacify her, being exceptionally tender and caring. The contradictions have been portrayed well by Tosar, although I sincerely wish, he was a little more communicative at the relatively softer moments of the character. Granted, the character required a degree of aloofness, just as a manifestation of the alienation from the rest of the world. Yet some scenes made me feel it was overdone.

Cinematically, this is an astounding production. This film boasts of a very powerful screenplay and equally good camerawork. The tender moments between the couple have been beautifully filmed, giving them an aching yet earthy appeal. Iciar Bollain, the actress turned director succeeds completely in making this a powerful film, putting forward a major problem of conjugal life, even in this modern world. The ancillary characters have been cleverly used. For example, Ana,(Candela Pena), Pilar’s sister is everything that Pilar is not, bold, bohemian and antagonized to Antonio for his mistreatment of her. Pilar’s mother on the other hand represents a generation of women who knew nothing but to take all abuse silently, and bear with it. Her helplessness manifests itself horribly when she suggests that her daughter “talk it over” with her husband, and return home, like a wife should. The sister and the mother stand at two extremes and Pilar is caught in between, in anxiety and dilemma.

Once again, this film is a statement. More for the perpetrators, than victims. The title “Take my eyes” hails from Pilar’s words to Antonio, in a moment of their love making. These three words transcend the passion and become a plea to her husband, to take a look at himself, to understand himself, and her. The message that comes out of this outstanding drama is not the fact that love is above everything. It is in fact quite the reverse. It puts forward the fact that some slights can not be forgiven, even by love. Pilar gives her husband a second chance, and tries to re build her life herself. But in the process she finds herself. So when abused again, she has the courage to finally get past the shadow of her love and face life alone, depicting an inner strength in all her sorrow. Antonio watches helplessly as she walks right out of their apartment, taking her things with her, fixing him with one final stare, before she closes the door.

No wonder this film won seven Goya awards, the Spanish equivalent to Oscars.


+ add to my favorite ilogs + flag objectionable content


Latest comments
Posted by quin on Thursday July 17, 2008 11:56 am
Good for you - and Good to know.
Happy writing
Posted by guru on Thursday July 17, 2008 10:57 am
Thanks but no thanks! I know who I am!

I guess there is a big cultural and generation gap between us. The meditation, and not verbalizing till emotions are intense has brought me from Rs. 2 per month Marathi school to a premier researcher in my field which involved planning for the Internet backbone which we are using, while working in one of the premier research lab in US. Thanks to america, IIT, Marathi medium school till XI std and the culture of India.

My weakness was written word, even in Marathi. It might be te paper and ink was too expensive for me while growing up. So it made me think and think before writing. Good practice per se but writing became a dreadful activity for me.
Posted by quin on Thursday July 17, 2008 09:36 am
your meditation is straying too far ...
your technique (tareeqa - in Sufi terminology)
may not be serving you very well -
change it - if you have to,
and mind your blind spots.
Posted by guru on Thursday July 17, 2008 09:05 am
"I thought I had that problem. Almost all desi do have it. "

I thought I had that problem, but after the brief interaction with this author I feel most of us desi have it. Some are able to hide it.

Anyway, I do not know the age of the author. At the age 25 my writing skills were 10% of the skills the writer of this piece. I was lucky my employer gave professional writer/secreatary to whom spoke and she transcribed and edited. I did not type. I do not now either.

I am more interested in my teen age boys to write well. We have hired a teacher to help them. I insist that they should do free flow writing even for their homework and assignment. They should not edit sentences corrected by the tutor but write again fresh the whole piece. Writing needs to come form your fingers/DNA.
Posted by guru on Thursday July 17, 2008 08:53 am
"their own creation ad infinitum and analyse the origin of their creations. "

When one utters in ones mother tongue, the emotions and thoughts come bundled with it. For many desi writers since English is not their mother tongue words and sentence structure do not match. I thought I had that problem. Almost all desi do have it. They might be able to hide it behind not yet over used and so fashionable cliches. You peel the skin and it strikes you that the beauty is truly skin deep. It is no ones fault. Writing prose and poem has become profession. Kavi in Sanskrit meant wise, almost realized person.

For me writing is a tool to organize my own thoughts. If they are organized then I am able to clean this pool of consciousness atleast in and around me. That helps in reaching "the light" to reach and clean the other parts. It's same as meditation. It is like the last 15 minutes of Vipassana meditation where you spread the mitta (mitra) bhav or the prayers Om Sahana Bhavatu Sahanu Bhunaktu or SarveBhavantu Sukhina...
Posted by quin on Thursday July 17, 2008 07:40 am
Guru, many writers, poets, musicians and other artists can create - but cannot be expected to dwell in their own creation ad infinitum and analyse the origin of their creations. That is just not the nature of creativity. And that is why we need critics/commentators in literature and other fields so the artists can be spared and so they can create more and eveyone can enjoy adn enjoy.
Tendency of trying to mould others in your own our frame is not different than 'fundamentalism' in religion. Accusing others of "muddled thinking and ... confusion." is being judgmental (your own revealing word in “I need to be careful in judging or praising”
Posted by ext-a-see on Thursday July 17, 2008 07:30 am
enlightened. :-)
Posted by guru on Wednesday July 16, 2008 11:17 pm
It seems our education and information overload leads to
this reflexive and semi-automatic one-dimensional response is a sure recipe for muddled thinking and consequent confusion.

I was hoping the writers who sound music at first hearing could throw light on the origin of their writing piece. I need to be careful in judging or praising just out of common courtsey.
Posted by quin on Wednesday July 16, 2008 08:21 am
@ext-a-see: you don't have to write about it (Whale Rider). Your taste might be different and you may not feel inspired from that movie (though the otherwise could be true as well). I was just curious about what your take might be on it as I was much intrigued by the subtle meaning in it. Once you have seen, you may just kindly send me your brief comment if you so incline - that is if you don't feel like writing about it. If you do, that will be hallelujah!
Posted by Lrning2Lv on Wednesday July 16, 2008 07:03 am
Good for you; and thanks for sparing us.
When the words are stretched too far and too thin to contain anything - but sounds only - then those deafen the ears and dull the senses - a paralysis. And we go to sleep.
Content, content where are thou!
"we utter words which we do not mean" - speak for yourself
"worldlessness is ...cure" practice makes a man perfect, so practice guru ji, practice, meditate so we can enjoy the movie (and the review) again
Posted by guru on Wednesday July 16, 2008 06:06 am
Yes! analysis per se might not be paralysis. Analysis using words which we do not understand causes paralysis. Our enslavement is so complete that we utter words which we do not mean and do not come out from deep inside. Wordlessness is really a cure for most of the problems we are facing in todays world.

I will stop using any more words.
Posted by ext-a-see on Wednesday July 16, 2008 05:56 am
@Lrning2Lv

I agree completely with you.


@ quin

I sure can, but give me some time, have to watch the movie first, from what IMDB says, it's interesting enough though.

@ guru
Language notwithstanding, it's apparent that we interpret same things differently.I wrote a simple movie review, if you liked it, I am grateful, if not, I appreciate your criticism. But all this discussion about beauty and what it means, is getting far too stretched and spoiling what I intended to do with this review. So I am stopping right here.
Posted by Lrning2Lv on Wednesday July 16, 2008 05:39 am
quote 1 analyis is paralysis
quote 2 brevity is soul of wit
NICE REVIEW: movies and 'talking about movies' is for sheer enjoyment - too much philozophizing spoils the enjoyment
Posted by Lrning2Lv on Wednesday July 16, 2008 05:39 am
quote 1 analyis is paralysis
quote 2 brevity is soul of wit
NICE REVIEW: movies and 'talking about movies' is for sheer enjoyment - too much philozophizing spoils the enjoyment
Posted by guru on Tuesday July 15, 2008 10:28 pm
Beauty, Sundar & Saudarya,

When immersed in viewing the movie when one forgot about oneself and gives expression to that experience ie Sundar. This analysis and your review is Saundarya. Beauty is more on Sundar side.
http://books.google.com/books?id=mFJVuVyQFR8C&pg=PA154&lpg=PA154& amp;dq=sundar+etymological+root&source=web&ots=q7KeVU2nSt&sig=IoLsjx AZiFU3qKHz36i2z1WxSYg&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=9&ct= result
Posted by guru on Tuesday July 15, 2008 09:58 pm
ext-a-see,

"It is sort of parochial here to conclude that love wins over all. in harsh reality, some situations siphon love right out of you, and this is one of those cases. The sooner you recognize it, the better."

Seems you are upset! Genuine thanks for the advice! In the last scene, Mother India shoots dead her own son who kidnaps neighbor's daughter. That shooting is also out of love.

The reality is not harsh our reactions make it growing or not growing experience. If love is growing in consciousness then it is same as learning. Living is learning. So love, learning and living is one and the same thing. Am I missing something? Why separate out love from living? Don't you think we have fixed and media enforced ideas about love which makes us separate out love?

"believe me, never in my life have I envisaged beaty in such complicated neo-scientific terminology. :-) I envision beauty to be a reflection of calmness, an inner strength of character, combined with self knowledge."

Now these are too many words which can blurr what we are focusing on, so please define "reflecton of calmness," "inner strength of character" and "combined with self knowledge." Would you call this nudging for defining is also beauty, because it will make us focus better?

I was trying to capture what is beauty in the words of this alien language called English. We both probably agree that beauty is something which aids in focusing and leads people to go inward. It's like the seed getting roots and going deeper in the earth .. that happens when the soil is wet or soaked. Sundar Indian equivalent of beauty is that weting of heart so that seed of understanding can grow first growing deeper.
Posted by quin on Tuesday July 15, 2008 08:15 pm
Well depicted gender dynamics - with all its peculiarities - and its dilemmas and contrasts – hinting at the bigger questions of life – without saying a word about that – just giving pointers to contemplate – that is all big art is about.
Thanks for bringing a new dimension at Chowk. You may want to submit it for FP (front page). Good reviews of really good movies are a boon – for one seeking delight in culture.
PS: Did you see my earlier comment about “Whale Rider” (your first review.)
Posted by ext-a-see on Tuesday July 15, 2008 05:09 pm
"I am assuming as a viwer you saw the beauty means your internal sense organs such as emotional mind, part of your mind which discriminates real from unreal resonated with the vibes of the scene and its characters. This resonance allows us to focus, meditate and allows us to connect (yoga) ..come to an understanding which alters us at DNA level...we become new being. Is that what happened to you? Would you define beauty like this?"

believe me, never in my life have I envisaged beaty in such complicated neo-scientific terminology. :-) I envision beauty to be a reflection of calmness, an inner strength of character, combined with self knowledge.

Love means helping some one to grow or raise their consciousness. The calm acceptance the female character depicted might be after understanding what is true love. Her leaving the husband is yet another act of love so that he gets new opportunity to grow. By leaving she decides not to play the role of abusee or victim. We all love through our wombs. esp women. If we consider that there is also an emotional and spiritual womb then we may not hesitate to give space or leave the loved ones.


after watching the film intently I am convinced that it was the growing out of love, rather than realising true love. After such degradation and violence, no one, no mortal soul would probably be able to love. it was her right to stand up to him and say "no, i would not be with you after this, I don't care whatever you do.", and she did it. If you would have watched the film, you would know that the woman had no love left in her. That was a way of her asserting herself. It is complicated to explain however.

And I really don't understand what you said about this womb thing, it went completely over my head.

If I were the director I would make the female character not stare but give a loving but assertive glance at the husband assuring that even if she was not going to be with him physically, he would be in her nurturing emotional-spiritual womb.

to each his own, but I tend to think it would have diminished the beauty and power of the whole movie. It is sort of parochial here to conclude that love wins over all. in harsh reality, some situations siphon love right out of you, and this is one of those cases. The sooner you recognize it, the better.



Posted by hurricane on Tuesday July 15, 2008 02:03 pm
guru ji,

I find you have a good grasp on the spiritual language. I invite you to become my chaila post haste :D

As my disciple, you will learn the teachings of my guru, mullah toofani, and the world will become a better place.

Posted by guru on Tuesday July 15, 2008 01:55 pm
You are very good with English language. It's still a foreign language for me.

"What I meant by that statement is that the inner beauty of the character shone through that moment of utter sorrow. "

I am assuming as a viwer you saw the beauty means your internal sense organs such as emotional mind, part of your mind which discriminates real from unreal resonated with the vibes of the scene and its characters. This resonance allows us to focus, meditate and allows us to connect (yoga) ..come to an understanding which alters us at DNA level...we become new being. Is that what happened to you? Would you define beauty like this?

"To me that strength was beautiful, because it came with a calm acceptance. In spite of loving the man, she decides that he has gone too much, degraded her far beyond than what she can take. Coming out of that shadow of blind love was necessary if that character was to survive ahead in love, and at this point, Pilar succeeds."

Love means helping some one to grow or raise their consciousness. The calm acceptance the female character depicted might be after understanding what is true love. Her leaving the husband is yet another act of love so that he gets new opportunity to grow. By leaving she decides not to play the role of abusee or victim. We all love through our wombs. esp women. If we consider that there is also an emotional and spiritual womb then we may not hesitate to give space or leave the loved ones.

Blind love was actually ignorance of oneself and what it means by true love. I guess you are saying that by "survive ahead of love." To me the character is stil in love with the husband.

"Antonio watches helplessly as she walks right out of their apartment, taking her things with her, fixing him with one final stare, before she closes the door."

If I were the director I would make the female character not stare but give a loving but assertive glance at the husband assuring that even if she was not going to be with him physically, he would be in her nurturing emotional-spiritual womb.

Hope I have not bored you and your artistic skills with English language are not affected by my bad English.
Posted by ext-a-see on Tuesday July 15, 2008 12:04 pm
@Guru

thank your for your comments. I'll try to answer your questions to the best of my abilities.

1. What do you mean by "“Take my eyes” ( Te Doy Mis Ojos -2003) is not merely a film. It’s a statement."? It is the name of the movie which probably states that for conjugal bliss to happen the couple need to be so much ONE that they see each other through exchanged eyes. Is it?

That's quite correct. But I have an additional reason why I think it's a statement. I explain it in the last paragraph.



2. What do you mean by "Together the couple starts gathering bits and pieces of their broken marriage, which becomes a self – recognizing exercise for both of them." ?
Every relationships have responsibilities, walls of acceptable behaviours and a growing sapling of emotional binding. Do you mean husband started working on responsibilites of giving financial security, home work of the child, etc and wife started understanding the husband and fulfilling his emotional needs?

No, what I meant was the husband tries to manage his own anger by seeing a therapist, and the wife tries to forget the abuse to which she had been subjected and start afresh. The responsibilities that you mentioned, while basic to bind the fabric of marriage is not the subject matter of this film, at least in my understanding.



3. What do you mean by beautiful in this "In one of the final moments of the film where she reports her husband to the police, she just says” He broke everything. Everything.” She is most beautiful at the moment, in her sorrow, yet self realization and determination. This performance is a testimonial to the immense talent of this actress."
Moreover isn't a film a director's medium? It is the director who lives the emotions and events of the film. Am I right?

I can see two questions, in this. I'll start with the first.

What I meant by that statement is that the inner beauty of the character shone through that moment of utter sorrow. She had been subjected to bad abuse, her faith in her husband was broken. Her faith in their marriage was broken. It was a sort of point of no return for her. To me that strength was beautiful, because it came with a calm acceptance. In spite of loving the man, she decides that he has gone too much, degraded her far beyond than what she can take. Coming out of that shadow of blind love was necessary if that character was to survive ahead in love, and at this point, Pilar succeeds. That's why I thought it was when she looked most beautiful.

Second question - Yes, I agree with you that a movie is a director's medium. But for the actors, the directors wouldn't have a voice. The actors portrayal of a character make it what it is. In this context Laia Marull excels. She deserves as much praise as the director.
Posted by ext-a-see on Tuesday July 15, 2008 11:54 am
@Guru

thank your for your comments. I'll try to answer your questions to the best of my abilities.

1. What do you mean by "“Take my eyes” ( Te Doy Mis Ojos -2003) is not merely a film. It’s a statement."? It is the name of the movie which probably states that for conjugal bliss to happen the couple need to be so much ONE that they see each other through exchanged eyes. Is it?

That's quite correct. But I have an additional reason why I think it's a statement. I explain it in the last paragraph.



2. What do you mean by "Together the couple starts gathering bits and pieces of their broken marriage, which becomes a self – recognizing exercise for both of them." ?
Every relationships have responsibilities, walls of acceptable behaviours and a growing sapling of emotional binding. Do you mean husband started working on responsibilites of giving financial security, home work of the child, etc and wife started understanding the husband and fulfilling his emotional needs?

No, what I meant was the husband tries to manage his own anger by seeing a therapist, and the wife tries to forget the abuse to which she had been subjected and start afresh. The responsibilities that you mentioned, while basic to bind the fabric of marriage is not the subject matter of this film, at least in my understanding.



3. What do you mean by beautiful in this "In one of the final moments of the film where she reports her husband to the police, she just says” He broke everything. Everything.” She is most beautiful at the moment, in her sorrow, yet self realization and determination. This performance is a testimonial to the immense talent of this actress."
Moreover isn't a film a director's medium? It is the director who lives the emotions and events of the film. Am I right?

I can see two questions, in this. I'll start with the first.

What I meant by that statement is that the inner beauty of the character shone through that moment of utter sorrow. She had been subjected to bad abuse, her faith in her husband was broken. Her faith in their marriage was broken. It was a sort of point of no return for her. To me that strength was beautiful, because it came with a calm acceptance. In spite of loving the man, she decides that he has gone too much, degraded her far beyond than what she can take. Coming out of that shadow of blind love was necessary if that character was to survive ahead in love, and at this point, Pilar succeeds. That's why I thought it was when she looked most beautiful.

Second question - Yes, I agree with you that a movie is a director's medium. But for the actors, the directors wouldn't have a voice. The actors portrayal of a character make it what it is. In this context Laia Marull excels. She deserves as much praise as the director.
Posted by guru on Tuesday July 15, 2008 11:19 am
This review is piece of art! Wish I need to take the eyes of the reviewer, so that I can understand the beauty of human emotions. Wish there was a school which teaches that. I am going to ask few dumb questions.

1. What do you mean by "“Take my eyes” ( Te Doy Mis Ojos -2003) is not merely a film. It’s a statement."? It is the name of the movie which probably states that for conjugal bliss to happen the couple need to be so much ONE that they see each other through exchanged eyes. Is it?

2. What do you mean by "Together the couple starts gathering bits and pieces of their broken marriage, which becomes a self – recognizing exercise for both of them." ?
Every relationships have responsibilities, walls of acceptable behaviours and a growing sapling of emotional binding. Do you mean husband started working on responsibilites of giving financial security, home work of the child, etc and wife started understanding the husband and fulfilling his emotional needs?

3. What do you mean by beautiful in this "In one of the final moments of the film where she reports her husband to the police, she just says” He broke everything. Everything.” She is most beautiful at the moment, in her sorrow, yet self realization and determination. This performance is a testimonial to the immense talent of this actress."
Moreover isn't a film a director's medium? It is the director who lives the emotions and events of the film. Am I right?

I would lke to know women's perspective.

Thanks again for the review. I come to this site very rarely.
Posted by ext-a-see on Tuesday July 15, 2008 10:15 am
@Delirium and Hurricane

thank you both for your appreciation. It was a singularly engaging film, which made me write such a long review.
Posted by hurricane on Tuesday July 15, 2008 09:29 am
This is really well written. You should submit your reviews to Front Page.
Posted by Delirium on Tuesday July 15, 2008 09:16 am
Not sure about the movie but the description is outstanding.

ext-a-see

  • Interacts: 0
  • iLogs: 5
  • Gallery: 2
  • Page views: 1509
  • Last visitor: guest
  • Member since: Jul 5 2008
  • Last signin: Aug 29 2008
  • Send a message
  • Add as friend
  • Add to ignore list
  • Add to block list

Favorite iLogs

  • My MUSIC PAGE
  • The Cup of Coffee............... an interesting article tht i came across
  • The Circus
  • Some thoughts on Sufis and Sufism
  • Small Things That Make A Big Difference

Top 5 Articles This Week

  • Popular
  • How real is your politik?
  • Ahmed Faraz: The Light Stays
  • Celebrating 61 Years of Broken Dreams
  • Writings on the Wall
  • Black Pencils
  • Featured
  • There are a Lot of Monkeys
  • White Charade
  • Words of a Woman
  • FOX News and the Smelly Shoes
  • Dilemmas of Creative Children
  • 10 Years Ago
  • Pakistan in State of Emergency
  • Winner Taketh All
  • Aitchison: Scenes From Within
  • Professor Abdus Salam
  • Can’t we too break the wall?

Write on Chowk Interact Guidelines Privacy policy Terms Contact

Copyright © 1997 - 2008 chowk.com. All Rights Reserved
Reproduction of material on any www.chowk.com pages without prior written permissions is strictly prohibited