#shonty

I'd heard of Kiarostami prior to seeing Ten; his film 'Taste of Cherry' is generally renowned by film fanatics. That, and he's the most prominent Iranian film maker alongside Asghar Farhadi; 'Iranian film maker' being in itself astounding (oppressive government, anti-liberal, etc). So when we were casually told that Ten's director is responsible for Taste of Terry, my interest skyrocketed. My back straightened. I was ready for some great film making (of course, I don't doubt that the VCA always shows us film making of supreme excellence. But, you know).

What we were shown was indeed some great film making, though it unexpected and initially jarring. I didn't know what to expect, but this was unlike anything I could hope to expect, because it is was so unique. A stand-out in the medium. A film with minimal action. Very infrequent movement. This is all obvious, but what I'm referring to is how we are shown only a handful of characters, and we are to make up our mind based solely on what they say and how they say it. Their facial expressions and body language are of extreme importance. How these betray emotion and only hint at it are among the remarkable aspects of the film. But they are there to simply provide a gateway to film's actual content. It certainly delivered in this respect - I was expecting waves of subtext concerned with the social issues of Iran, and that's exactly what I got. Women's place in Iranian society was thoroughly explored, from various angles, and in the most natural way possible. But the film goes deeper. It carefully constructed a wider picture of Iranian society as a whole. What stuck with me most was the constant battle between the old and new, the conservative and the liberal. All passengers of the Driver character expressed their worries with the mindset of a conservative Iran. They spoke with the expectations of Iranian society hovering over them. The Driver provided, though at times meekly, alternatives for her passengers' problems. These alternatives were forward thinking, at times outrageous (given the context). You could see and feel the Driver's frustration; for example when she transported the old woman. The woman was completely set in her ways. The Driver was frustrated but helpless in this situation. What is the point?, she thought. The transportation of the prostitute bore the complete opposite. The Driver was adamant in trying to sway her passenger's mindset. Here was a young girl who, despite her own resistance to liberation, had a mind that could still be molded...but not by the Driver as it turns out. It is not so simple. These societal issues are deeply embedded in Iran's extensive cultural history. Then again, perhaps the suggestion is that seeds of doubt can grow and spread. How else can the Driver, who is already so restricted, change anything?  The most interesting interactions are between the Driver and her son. Go read Shonty's post for a brief analysis of what is really happening here. I admit I was initially unsure what to make of these sections of the film. The boy was obviously a little shit, but he was also just a young boy. The boy in my eyes is something altogether separate from what his mother represents, and what her other passengers represent. He is Iran's future. He is not set in his ways. He is still developing and acting entirely on emotion. His love for his mother and loyalty to his father drive his actions. His actions, words, emotions are those of a child.