Mary (2005)

Don't listen to the negative reviews

Best movie ever!

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

There are moments in this movie where the great movie it could've been peek out... They're fleeting, here, but they're worth savoring, and they happen often enough to make it worth your while.

Today I saw Ferrara's "Mary" for the third time and still was not able to get under its chameleon skin. There are some characteristics which I'm almost sure of. It's provocative. It boasts raising relevant questions which need not be considered solely religious. It indulges in emotional hyperboles bordering on kitsch. (Whitaker's endless monologue reminded me of Keitel's repeated howling in "Bad Lieutenant", similarly torturous and ridiculous at the same time.) It's structurally sophisticated, visually appealing, and probably honest .... But I can't get the message. Or to be more precise : I am not quite sure that this critical treatise on modern life + values is more than a cheap sermon in the end.Mary is the key figure within my dilemma. I wonder if the director would admit the possibility that she, too, is an erring child of her time - neurotic, confused, prone to self-delusion while searching for truth/meaning of life .... The shots of the fishing boat in the final segment (including that suite of Semitic beauties at dawn !) seem very questionable to me.One of my favourite reviewers, Mr. Ekkehard Knoerer, doubts whether the director and his screenwriters actually know what they want and do. I don't know either ; but then again, sometimes it's better not to know.

I'll need to start at the end of this film. No spoiler, don't worry. Just me saying, "Huh?" Ferrara's rambling, affected film left me stranded at the end in a Dead Sea. I really wanted to find something to recommend in this film, but all I could think of was how unfocused it was, how miscast, and how dull. One particular problem was Ferrara couldn't decide if he wanted to make an investigative documentary or a inspiring religious drama. On the one side we've got real theologians yammering away about Jesus and Mary, and clips of violence in Palestine. On the other side we have two stories about New Yorkers having spiritual identity crises, and an actress still neurotically lost in her role wandering through the streets of Jerusalem looking for something to eat, or something. In the end we get a murky, arty film with meandering plot lines that don't really go anywhere.In addition we have a casting problem. Juliette Binoche as the ersatz Magdalene plays her role as a treacly, new-agey Christian proselytizer. She reminded me of the people who accost you on buses asking you if you've found Jesus yet.Modine and Whitaker, both plainly uncomfortable playing their roles, end up giving us melodramatic performances that, when arriving at the moment of spiritual catharsis, cause them to start chewing up the scenery. I couldn't help thinking that Whitaker's appeal to God in a hospital chapel made him look like a subject in a Goya painting, but without the pathos that the artist's subjects engenders. Both actors were not able to evince any genuine feelings, which is due mostly to a plot that doesn't allow them to develop their characters in the first place.Better to watch Kazantzakis, or even Gibson. Or see "Cammina, Cammina" by Ermanno Olmi.

It is really hard to understand what kind of message this film is supposed to convey. We have several threads of story that start and seem to lead nowhere. Juliette Binoche is an actress who after acting as Mary in a film about the life of Jesus is struck by religious fervor and apparently starts identifying herself wit the the Bible character. Forest Whitaker is a religious TV host who does not seem to care to much about God, but when disaster strikes his personal life he remembers Him and starts praying and believing - are we supposed to believe as viewers that this sincere? The film about Jesus starts some kind of controversy which seems to refer to Mel Gibson, but the real Mel Gibson as much as I may not like him is certainly sincere in his beliefs, and does not look like the cynical character in this film. Although 'Mary' lasts only 83 minutes the screen time is too long, so it is filled up with scenes of the biblical story (from the film in the film, or trying to convey some confuse metaphor? who cares?) and an episode of a Jewish Passover celebration in Jerusalem interrupted by an act of terror with no connection whatever with the rest of the story.It is hard to grasp why this film was made, what is it really trying to say and why actors like Juliette Binoche and the now-Oscared Forest Whitaker got involved with it. They act well, but it's wasted talent. Unless you are a fan of Bible inspired films, there is no good reason to spend the time seeing it.

During the 80's and 90's,director Abel Ferrara was one of the leaders of the independent cinema making amazing films which challenged the spectator.But,his recent works are far away from his previous works.New Rose Hotel and R Xmas were a little bit disappointing but they were interesting experiments.But,I do not know what was Ferrara thinking when he was making Mary,a tedious and boring movie and,by my point of view,a huge let down in his career.During 83 minutes,the movie shows us three stories which are totally boring and uninteresting.I think Ferrara wanted to make an analysis about the religion but,still with that,I think he had to do a better work to make a coherent connection between the stories.For me,it is very disappointing that Ferrara,who made excellent films with very little resources(like,for example,Bad Lieutenant,The Addiction,Ms.45 and The Body Snatchers),was behind this crap.I hope Mary is only an unexplainable false move in Ferrara's career and that,he will get redeemed soon.But I cannot recommend Mary,which is a tedious film.