Page 5 of 5
Re: 486 Homicide
Posted: Thu Dec 05, 2013 3:01 am
by knives
Also as a capper to my inanity I don't think the film lacks artifice, but that the dialogue (and characters and themes) is not what is artificial more than necessary in constructing a film.
Re: 486 Homicide
Posted: Sat Jan 11, 2014 12:58 pm
by Kauno
Mr Sausage wrote:Anyway, the reason I popped in here was to ask about an odd moment: when Gold is in the apartment watching the various people give their condolences to the family, he observes one elderly man give a very long speech in German. Except when he asks the woman what's being said, she says it's in Hebrew and gives a translation whose accuracy I can't fully judge because I was having trouble hearing the German in the background. This can't be a mistake on behalf of the filmmakers, not only because it isn't remotely plausible, but because several other characters speak Hebrew later in the film.
Actually you got it wrong there. The woman says: "It's not Hebrew. He's speaking Yiddish." Nevertheless, this puzzles me also. I know that German and Yiddish are very similar, but I'm still surprised I can fully understand what the old man is saying. I think it's not Yiddish but indeed German.
Re: 486 Homicide
Posted: Sat Jan 11, 2014 2:52 pm
by Mr Sausage
Kauno wrote:Mr Sausage wrote:Anyway, the reason I popped in here was to ask about an odd moment: when Gold is in the apartment watching the various people give their condolences to the family, he observes one elderly man give a very long speech in German. Except when he asks the woman what's being said, she says it's in Hebrew and gives a translation whose accuracy I can't fully judge because I was having trouble hearing the German in the background. This can't be a mistake on behalf of the filmmakers, not only because it isn't remotely plausible, but because several other characters speak Hebrew later in the film.
Actually you got it wrong there. The woman says: "It's not Hebrew. He's speaking Yiddish." Nevertheless, this puzzles me also. I know that German and Yiddish are very similar, but I'm still surprised I can fully understand what the old man is saying. I think it's not Yiddish but indeed German.
You're right! Both my Dad and I misheard that. Don't know why, maybe some noise drowned out the "it's Yiddish" part.
Pretty sure it's Yiddish. I youtubed some videos of people speaking Yiddish, including a video of two people saying the same sentence in both Yiddish and German, and they really are that close.
Re: 486 Homicide
Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2014 6:46 pm
by jindianajonz
I just watched this film last night, and had a question:
if there was no conspiracy (as people in this thread have suggested) and Gould merely got sucked in by his own paranoia, who was the man standing on the roof across from the apartment, supposedly firing a gun?
I guess this kind of relates to what I loved and hated about this movie, even at the end, Mamet never quite allows you to be certain of what is going on, and
makes the audience just as paranoid as Gould is. There are a lot of events that could be construed as coincidence- perhaps the guy on the roof was just a random guy, and maybe it was pure chance that a dropped letter changed the name of a dove food brand to a nickname for Hitler. But as more and more of these random occurances happen, the audience finds themselves questioning if these things really are random, and quickly find themselves getting sucked into this possible conspiracy just as much as Gould did. The fact that this is never resolved with certainly leaves the audience paranoid even after the credits roll.
I'm also trying to understand why Mamet chose Judaism as a central theme for this film. Early on, the film seems to side squarely with the slain womans family, but raising the specter of a vast Jewish conspiracy steering Gould into doing its bidding has more than a few shades of anti-semitism to it. I also wonder if Mamet was anticipating the
trend in recent years for American support of Israel to shift from its traditional base in liberal Jewish Democrats to the more hawkish GOP- I can certainly see Gould questioning how closely his newly reborn Jewish identity binds him to the extreme tactics of the "Zionists".
Re: 486 Homicide
Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2014 6:53 pm
by knives
Mostly because it is a central theme in all of his work. Maybe not so explicitly, but I can't recall a play or film which didn't play to Judaism. You really wouldn't have this film without the explicit use of zionism in its multiple forms.
Re: 486 Homicide
Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2014 7:12 pm
by domino harvey
You think Mamet's work here has shades of anti-Semitism? I just... I... oh lord... I think need to lie down
Re: 486 Homicide
Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2014 7:14 pm
by knives
I didn't even notice that line. That is, for lack of a better word, incredible.
Re: 486 Homicide
Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2014 7:37 pm
by jindianajonz
domino harvey wrote:You think Mamet's work here has shades of anti-Semitism? I just... I... oh lord... I think need to lie down
I'm apparently missing something here- is Mamet known for being overly pro or anti-Semitic? I'm not familiar with his work outside of Glengary, Glenn Ross and House of Cards (and I didn't notice any treatment of Judaism in either of them) so I don't have much context that I can approach this film with.
486 Homicide
Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2014 7:37 pm
by Mr Sausage
JindianaJonz is confused. He thinks the 'conspiracy' is Jewish. It's not: it's an anti-Jewish conspiracy that the Zionists are battling.
The Jewish aspect of the movie is crucial to Bobby Gould's identity crisis, ie. the very thing propelling the movie.
EDIT: Mamet is himself Jewish, hence Jewishness is an important issue to him, Jindiana Jonz.
Re: 486 Homicide
Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2014 7:41 pm
by jindianajonz
Mr Sausage wrote:JindianaJonz is confused. He thinks the 'conspiracy' is Jewish. It's not: it's an anti-Jewish conspiracy that the Zionists are battling.
The Jewish aspect of the movie is crucial to Bobby Gould's identity crisis, ie. the very thing propelling the movie.
EDIT: Mamet is himself Jewish, hence Jewishness is an important issue to him, Jindiana Jonz.
Wow, I apparently missed something pretty crucial. Are you saying that the guys blackmailing Gould with the photos at the end are the anti-semites? If true, I totally did not catch that, and it totally changes how I read the film.
Re: 486 Homicide
Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2014 7:44 pm
by domino harvey
Mamet also wrote an entire non-fiction book on anti-Semitism, the Wicked Son
Re: 486 Homicide
Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2014 7:46 pm
by knives
jindianajonz wrote:domino harvey wrote:You think Mamet's work here has shades of anti-Semitism? I just... I... oh lord... I think need to lie down
I'm apparently missing something here- is Mamet known for being overly pro or anti-Semitic? I'm not familiar with his work outside of Glengary, Glenn Ross and House of Cards (and I didn't notice any treatment of Judaism in either of them) so I don't have much context that I can approach this film with.
I haven't seen
House of Cards yet, but Mamet has been very open about part of
Glengarry Glenn Ross being an attempt to take the Semitic subtext of Death of a Salesman and change it into text through a very aggressive portrayal of the Jewish difference. It's very important to the text of the play/ film to understand Levene (Jewish name) as an explicitly Jewish Willy Loman stand in. Mamet himself has been known to quote Maimonides in regards to people not knowing there is a Jewish text to his works.
Re: 486 Homicide
Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2014 7:47 pm
by knives
jindianajonz wrote:Mr Sausage wrote:JindianaJonz is confused. He thinks the 'conspiracy' is Jewish. It's not: it's an anti-Jewish conspiracy that the Zionists are battling.
The Jewish aspect of the movie is crucial to Bobby Gould's identity crisis, ie. the very thing propelling the movie.
EDIT: Mamet is himself Jewish, hence Jewishness is an important issue to him, Jindiana Jonz.
Wow, I apparently missed something pretty crucial. Are you saying that the guys blackmailing Gould with the photos at the end are the anti-semites? If true, I totally did not catch that, and it totally changes how I read the film.
No, the blackmailers are Jews, but they're fighting an anti-Jewish conspiracy with their deal being a straightforward act of political zionism.
Re: 486 Homicide
Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2014 7:50 pm
by Mr Sausage
jindianajonz wrote:Mr Sausage wrote:JindianaJonz is confused. He thinks the 'conspiracy' is Jewish. It's not: it's an anti-Jewish conspiracy that the Zionists are battling.
The Jewish aspect of the movie is crucial to Bobby Gould's identity crisis, ie. the very thing propelling the movie.
EDIT: Mamet is himself Jewish, hence Jewishness is an important issue to him, Jindiana Jonz.
Wow, I apparently missed something pretty crucial. Are you saying that the guys blackmailing Gould with the photos at the end are the anti-semites? If true, I totally did not catch that, and it totally changes how I read the film.
No, you've misunderstood. The 'conspiracy' is GROFAZ, a secret anti-semitic cell that may or may not be targeting jewish people who were once involved in covert Israeli actions in the early part of the twentieth century.
The Zionist cell that blackmails him is not the conspiracy--they are the supposed targets of it. Although we eventually learn there is probably no conspiracy targeting old Israli fighters, there is still a covert battle going on between Zionists and anti-semites in New York (or wherever the movie takes place).
Re: 486 Homicide
Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2014 7:54 pm
by domino harvey
It takes place in Baltimore, which has a surprisingly large Jewish population
Re: 486 Homicide
Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2014 7:57 pm
by jindianajonz
knives wrote:jindianajonz wrote:Mr Sausage wrote:JindianaJonz is confused. He thinks the 'conspiracy' is Jewish. It's not: it's an anti-Jewish conspiracy that the Zionists are battling.
The Jewish aspect of the movie is crucial to Bobby Gould's identity crisis, ie. the very thing propelling the movie.
EDIT: Mamet is himself Jewish, hence Jewishness is an important issue to him, Jindiana Jonz.
Wow, I apparently missed something pretty crucial. Are you saying that the guys blackmailing Gould with the photos at the end are the anti-semites? If true, I totally did not catch that, and it totally changes how I read the film.
No, the blackmailers are Jews, but they're fighting an anti-Jewish conspiracy with their deal being a straightforward act of political zionism.
Ok, that's what I thought. I was merely commenting that the idea of an underground group of Jewish "terrorists" using blackmail to ensure the loyalty of its members seems like it could have been taken out of the Protocol of the Elders of Zion. Certainly a "vast Jewish conspiracy" is a well-known anti-semitic smear, and this movie seems to give credence to that idea. I'm not sure what you mean by "straightforward act of political Zionism" but given how hard it was for Gould to track down the 212 organization, they certainly aren't operating in the open and aboveboard.
And Mr Sausage- wasn't it revealed at the end that Grofaz was in fact Grofazt, a company that makes dove food (hence being found on the roof with all the bird cages)? Or are we supposed to understand that this dove-food company is a front for anti-semites?
EDIT: And just so I'm clear, I'm not at all suggesting Mamet is anti-semitic- I just thought it was interesting that his story steered so close to a known anti-semitic trope.
Re: 486 Homicide
Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2014 8:05 pm
by Mr Sausage
jindianajonez wrote:Ok, that's what I thought. I was merely commenting that the idea of an underground group of Jewish "terrorists" using blackmail to ensure the loyalty of its members seems like it could have been taken out of the Protocol of the Elders of Zion. Certainly a "vast Jewish conspiracy" is a well-known anti-semitic smear, and this movie seems to give credence to that idea. I'm not sure what you mean by "straightforward act of political Zionism" but given how hard it was for Gould to track down the 212 organization, they certainly aren't operating in the open and aboveboard.
They're not an underground group of terrorists, they're an Israeli sleeper cell who carry out one violent act in the belief that an anti-semitic terrorist organization (GROFAZ) is targetting them. They are neither a conspiracy nor terrorists; as best we can tell, they are members of the Israeli army carrying out secret political missions in order to further stabilize Israel's nationhood.
jindianajonz wrote:And Mr Sausage- wasn't it revealed at the end that Grofaz was in fact Grofazt, a company that makes dove food (hence being found on the roof with all the bird cages)? Or are we supposed to understand that this dove-food company is a front for anti-semites?
As I said, it's revealed there likely is no conspiracy and that former members of the Israeli cell are not, indeed, being targetted. Although evidently there are still anti-semites at work in Baltimore (thanks for the correction, dom), they are apparently waging their war on propagandistic rather than overtly violent grounds.
Re: 486 Homicide
Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2014 8:07 pm
by knives
It's important to look at that element of the film as a parable. Mamet is making literal how the removal of the experience of the Jew is impossible even as he can't feel comfortable working within the community which is a problem very common for Jews of Mamet's generation where assimilation and secularization were the issues. Mamet is taking this very common experience and filtering it through genre story telling.
Re: 486 Homicide
Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2014 8:09 pm
by domino harvey
domino harvey wrote:Interesting
essay on Mamet's use of conspiracies in the film
Might be helpful, JJ
Re: 486 Homicide
Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2020 6:43 pm
by therewillbeblus
Going back to this film again reinforces why it’s my favorite Mamet. The concepts of thwarted belongingness and existential identity crises are emphasized through the processes of action and suppression engaging in a gridlocked tug-of-war throughout. Gold is continually stopped from freely wielding his agency at work, but his job provides a safely organized space where he can exist blindly without questioning the enigmatic psychological void that haunts humanity in urban spiritually-segregated space. Even though consistent disruptions insert themselves into this system to threaten his sense of self, the consequences pale to the risks of betting one's confidence on a more intimate yet foreign community. His emergence into self-reflection and expanded identity-definition comes at the cost of leaving these grounds which were safe-by-comparison to achieve not self-importance, but the permission to lower
his need to be self-important through a community membership that will cradle him and share his load.
When he’s knocked down again at the end, he seemingly illogically calls Randolph back to tell him the truth about his mother's betrayal. Is he helping Randolph ‘see’ the light, or is this an example of ‘hurt people hurt people’ -an act of masochistic self-flagellation to promote power over someone after being emasculated of his gun and identity for the nth time. Is Gold even aware of what he's doing- perhaps believing that he's helping Randolph see the "nature of good and evil" as binary poles through martyrdom, when it's really just an extension of his defense mechanisms fighting against nihilistic sabotage with moral desperation through the last-legs pathetic means of verbal agency? [For Mamet, whose identity rests, among other things, between a master of linguistics and a Jew, there seems to be a self-conscious admission to questioning the value of his skills in the face of larger questions that overwhelm him and threaten his worldview in intangible forms.]
The final look with the killer at the end forges an authentic identification, but it's with someone who belongs nowhere and thus a mark of death. The film's psychological dance between coasting with ignorance and obsessively searching for meaning reminded me of the dual characters in Pynchon's V., though this merger does not form a balance in complementing the other side's deficit, and is instead traumatic and soul-shattering, caustically imploding and erasing the ability to escape into repression or actualize one's needs. In order for that to occur, Gold's environment would need to support his journey, and Mamet draws a world that doesn't have an interest in validating Gold with the importance that he craves nor supports him in his newfound sobriety to existence's purgatory state. The idea of being branded with permanent depression at the awareness of a Sisyphean struggle without purpose is supremely tragic, and gestures at the possibility that we repress these vulnerable deviations from our socially-determinist autopilot state for good reason.
As for the debate around the degree to which the Zionist organization was involved in manipulating Gold in this conspiracy, or the 'plot holes' that we can intellectualize before and following this, the point seems to be that it doesn't matter. Once he's shown the polaroids, all reasons and consequences are muted by the impact of being traumatically violated after lowering the safety nets and forfeiting the precious asset of trust.