Disclaimer: This post contains so, so many spoilers, and
it probably won’t make a shred of sense unless you’ve seen both Certified Copy and Vertigo.
Some films are riddles -- puzzles waiting to be put
together, codes waiting to be cracked, jokes waiting for a punch line.
At their core, riddle-films are cinematic questions -- ones
that require viewers to come up with answers on their own. Films like Mulholland
Drive, Last Year at Marienbad, and even gimmicky blockbusters like Inception may seem indecipherable on first viewing,
but they’re not total enigmas. Those willing to do the painstaking, obsessive
detective work these films demand will find clues for deciphering the films’
central mysteries. There’s a lot of heavy interpretive lifting involved, but
never without some kind of pay-off.
In this sense, Abbas Kiarostami’s Certified Copy is a textbook riddle-film.
It asks its viewers: What exactly is the relationship between the characters played by Juliette Binoche and William Shimell? As they stroll through a Tuscan resort town, why do they lash out at each other so abruptly? Why does it begin to seem like these strangers actually share a long and turbulent history together?
It asks its viewers: What exactly is the relationship between the characters played by Juliette Binoche and William Shimell? As they stroll through a Tuscan resort town, why do they lash out at each other so abruptly? Why does it begin to seem like these strangers actually share a long and turbulent history together?
No single solution to Certified Copy’s riddle will be definitive or irrefutable. But at
the same time, shrugging the film off as incomprehensible is a cop-out. With
films like these, it’s important to have an answer, even if it’s not the
answer. But be careful not to come up with
a wrong answer. Because there certainly are wrong answers.
Many critics arrived at wrong answers simply by asking the
wrong questions. “Were they a couple pretending to meet for the first time or a
new couple pretending to be married?” asks Roger Ebert in his tepid review of Certified
Copy. Mick LaSalle poses a similar
either/or question: “Are these people two strangers discovering fascinating
clashes and affinities, or have they known each other for years? Are they, in
fact, husband and wife?”
This construction is a total red herring. Only two answers
to this question are possible – either they’re married, or they’re not – and
neither captures what’s actually going on in Certified Copy.*
Here’s my humble opinion about what’s going on in Certified
Copy: They’re not married. They’ve never
met. But the second half of the film does not depict two strangers pretending
to be married. Rather, everything following the scene in the café when the old
woman mistakes Binoche and Shimell for husband and wife happens from the
woman’s subjective perspective. She’s projecting her desires onto the
situation, imagining an alternate relationship between herself and this man
she’s just met.
We’re watching Binoche trying (and more often than not,
failing) to fashion her ideal husband out of the rather rude stranger she’s
actually with. Her bratty son sums it up perfectly when he precociously
observes, “I know you like this James and want to fall in love with him.”
Throughout the film, Kiarostami explores the distinction
between originals and copies. You can’t miss this central theme -- it’s spelled
out right in the title. The characters mostly argue about art: she says
reproductions pale in comparison to originals, while he maintains they’re perfectly
good artworks in their own right.
But Kiarostami follows this theme into another register
entirely, investigating how reality stacks up in comparison to ideals:
conceptions about how the world should be. Going into this first date, Binoche
holds an idealized version of the perfect husband in her mind. She’d like
Shimell to manifest this ideal in reality. She hopes this stranger will turn
out to be a faithful copy of the ideal she originally holds in her mind.
But when held to this standard, Shimell turns out to be an
unfaithful reproduction. He fails to reproduce the courtyard statue’s support
for her. He doesn’t remember crucial details about their honeymoon. He doesn’t
shave every day. She’s trying to fashion her original ideal out of an
unfaithful copy, and he stubbornly bristles at her attempts to impose this
ideal on him.
On the top, Shimell reluctantly follows Binoche into a
church. Below, Scotty runs after Madeline, who’s just made a mad-dash
into the church of Mission San Juan Bautista. The subtle rhyme between these
two scenes primed me to notice more obvious similarities between Certified
Copy and Vertigo later.
Here’s a useful rule of thumb: whenever a film shows a man
trailing a woman up a twisty flight of stairs, it’s a Vertigo reference. What Citizen Kane did for sleds, Vertigo did for staircases. By incorporating this image into
Certified Copy, Kiarostami is
practically begging you to think about the connection between his film and Vertigo.
In case you still haven’t caught the connection, Kiarostami
echoes Vertigo’s iconic bell tower in Certified
Copy’s final shot. These aren’t cinematic
coincidences, and Kiarostami isn’t just treading in Vertigo’s visual territory. He’s also exploring the same
premise: two characters that may or may not have a history together meet, and
one tries to make the other one over.
This isn’t to say that Kiarostami recycles Hitchcock’s
ideas. He actually reverses many of Vertigo’s
tropes, finding fresh takes on old themes. For instance, in Certified
Copy the character doing the makeover is a
woman, while the one with all the agency in Vertigo is a man. Scotty violently shoves Judy up the
steeple’s staircase at the end, but Binoche is far gentler. She calmly leads
Shimell upstairs to their honeymoon hotel room. The final scenes in Vertigo reach a fever pitch of madness, deceit and
manipulation, but the tone of Certified Copy’s conclusion is plaintive, wistful and meditative.
Kiarostami’s most significant reversal, though, comes in the
film’s final scene. In Vertigo, Scotty
never managed to make Judy into the woman he originally desired, and his
pursuit of the Madeline ideal led to her tragic death. No one dies at the end of
Certified Copy. As is typical in
Kiarostami films, it actually has a somewhat happy ending. It’s ambiguous,
sure, but there’s a slight tonal shift upward.
Binoche has been complaining about Shimell’s lax shaving
regimen throughout their date, which falls on a no-shave day. His stubble
constantly reminds her of his shortcomings; it measures the gap between the
original and the copy. But in the final shot, that haunting moment that we
watch Shimell gaze out toward us, he’s clean-shaven.
All of a sudden, he becomes a faithful reproduction of her
ideal husband. He becomes, quite literally, the man of her dreams. But --
through some divine hand – Binoche gets the man she originally wanted. What
should we make of this ending? We never see Shimell shave, so how did his beard
vanish? I’m not sure.
Anyone know the answer?
*If you need the nit-picking details about why neither of
these answers work, join me for some debunking:
The first answer – they’re strangers who start to act like a
married couple as their date progresses -- seems incredibly flimsy to me. One’s
disbelief has to be suspended pretty damn low to imagine that two strangers
would spontaneously agree to engage in such elaborate (not to mention
upsetting) marital role-playing. And how do they know so much about each other?
Or rather, how do both make up the same fictional history of their marriage on
the fly? I could imagine someone arguing that Kiarostami uses these paradoxes
to make some sort of statement about the kinship between acting and lying, or
how cinema is just a big game of make-believe. But I suspect he’s up to
something much more interesting.
The only other conclusion to be drawn here – they’re a
married couple who pretend to be strangers at the outset of this date, perhaps in
some attempt to rekindle their dying marriage – is demonstrably wrong. Later in
the film, Shimell chastises Binoche for falling asleep at the wheel while
driving their son to visit him in Rome. This situation violates the logic of an
earlier scene in the film, when Binoche’s son teases her for having a crush on
Shimell. If you’re going to make the argument that they were married all along,
you’ll have to come up with some really goofy reason as to why the son doesn’t
recognize his own father, even though he’s visited Shimell regularly according
to the couple’s later arguments. There’s a plot-hole here that can’t be
plugged.
No comments:
Post a Comment