Spinozablue: An Eclectic Journal of the Arts

Nighthawks, by Edward Hop­per. 1942. Art Insti­tute of Chicago.

Wong Kar-wai’s My Blue­berry Nights sparks a mul­ti­tude of thoughts for me. Already an admirer of his pre­vi­ous work, I came to the film with some minor dis­com­fort in need of assuag­ing. Funny thing about that dis­com­fort. I didn’t even real­ize I had it until I was well into the film. And some of that real­iza­tion made me uncom­fort­able with the dis­com­fort itself.

Part of it was because the film is so beau­ti­ful on the sur­face. Wong Kar-​​wai has always been a mas­ter of color, hue, sat­u­ra­tion, fram­ing and time. He has always been able to make the pas­sage of time a visual event, vis­ceral, some­times wist­ful, often a char­ac­ter within the story itself. Time moves across his screen, changes up, slows down, speeds up again. Blurs. Trails. Comes into focus. Then stops again. And he has always cho­sen actresses who can make the cam­era love them. Wong Kar-​​Wai may be, among cur­rent direc­tors, the best at pre­sent­ing female beauty.

But it was the aspect of new lan­guage and locale in this film that stumped me the most. Wong Kar-​​wai was born in China in 1958, then moved with his fam­ily to Hong Kong at the age of five. He went from speak­ing Man­darin to hav­ing to learn Can­tonese almost overnight, uti­liz­ing count­less hours at the movies to help that tran­si­tion. Becom­ing a film­maker almost seems like fate, given his story. Per­haps mak­ing yet another tran­si­tion was fate as well.

My Blue­berry Nights is his first movie in Eng­lish, and the first movie of his I’ve seen with pre­dom­i­nantly Amer­i­can actors. I loved his ear­lier films set in Asia (Days of Being Wild, Chungk­ing Express, In the Mood for Love, and 2046), star­ring great Chi­nese and Japan­ese actors. Even though I needed sub­ti­tles to under­stand the dia­logue, I felt at home with the world on the screen, con­nected in a strange way, while another part of me sensed the for­eign­ness and was even more involved. And the sound­track just height­ened the effect. Wong Kar-​​wai, like Haruki Murakami, is a Jazz afi­cionado, and a lover of Amer­i­can and British pop tunes and clas­sic stan­dards. He mixes this in bril­liantly with his story lines. It’s all the more effec­tive given the prove­nance of the music and the set­tings of his films. The con­trast. The jar­ring jux­ta­po­si­tion that looks and sounds so smooth on the screen.

This time, how­ever, the music would still be Amer­i­can and Euro­pean, but the set­ting would be, too. New York, Mem­phis, parts of Nevada and Cal­i­for­nia. No broad cul­tural con­tra­pun­tal. No delight­fully jar­ring mix.

But music was still a key, as was the lan­guage, and I found that it didn’t take that long for it to begin to work for me. It didn’t take that long before I didn’t care any­more that I wasn’t watch­ing another of his visu­ally stun­ning films set in Asia, with Asian stars speak­ing Chi­nese. Once the movie cre­ated its own world, it’s own set of rules and tim­ing, I set­tled into that world, and Wong Kar-Wai’s artistry did the rest.

Music prob­a­bly started the whole project. The film stars Norah Jones, a gifted singer/​songwriter, the daugh­ter of Ravi Shankar, and yet another embod­i­ment of cul­tural change, fusion, tran­si­tion and its beau­ti­ful effects. Wong Kar-​​wai decided to do a film with her as the star long before he started mak­ing it. A pre­vi­ous short film of his was the basis, but Norah Jones was the rai­son d’être. It would be her first star­ring role. Another gifted singer/​songerwriter, Cat Power (Chan Mar­shall), stars as Jude Law’s ex-​​girlfriend, Katya, and two of her songs grace the soundtrack.

Which brings us closer to the story itself. I know, it took me long enough!

So, we have Norah Jones as Eliz­a­beth, wan­der­ing into a lit­tle café in New York, owned by Jude Law, who plays Jeremy. She’s a bit fraz­zled, tired, and upset after dis­cov­er­ing her boyfriend ate at that diner with another woman. There’s some nice sym­bol­ism regard­ing a bowl of lost keys and Eliz­a­beth returns to the diner a few more times. She and Jeremy strike up a rather guarded friend­ship that nei­ther really under­stands ini­tially. Though Jeremy is quicker to sense its pos­si­bil­i­ties. Blue­berry pie and ice cream mix with the won­der­ful visual palette of the film. The eyes get their dessert often enough.

Eliz­a­beth soon decides that she needs to leave New York. This is often a move peo­ple make after a trau­matic breakup, and prob­a­bly accounts for most of the great geo­graph­i­cal dis­cov­er­ies through the cen­turies. Colum­bus, no doubt, was jilted prior to ask­ing for funds for his famous voy­age. Bren­dan the Nav­i­ga­tor was thrown out of his house by his Irish girl­friend after com­ing home too late one too many times. Leif Erickson’s girl­friend did the same thing to him. And Marco Polo left Italy for the Ori­ent because he for­got his mistress’s birth­day three years in a row.

Eliz­a­beth becomes Lizzie and Beth and other vari­a­tions of her full name along the way, and meets David Strathairn, Rachel Weitz and Natalie Port­man as she moves west. She writes post­cards to Jeremy back east, telling him about her new acquain­tances, their lives, their tragedies, choos­ing a form of com­mu­ni­ca­tion with­out the risk of direct responses in the moment. The story within the story involv­ing David Strathairn’s char­ac­ter, Arnie, a police­man by day and a drunk by night, is mov­ing and could reside inside the paint­ing above. His ex, Sue Lynne (Rachel Weitz), left him for another, per­haps many oth­ers, and he can’t let go. Oddly enough, either can she, even though she’s mostly gone. Wong Kar-​​Wai gets a lot out of small moments and decep­tively sim­ple plot lines. There is a uni­ver­sal­ity in play that is never over­taken by the strong color mix, the music, or the idio­syn­crasies of the characters.

But it is Lizzie’s time with Natalie Portman’s char­ac­ter, Leslie, the gam­bling daugh­ter of a gam­bler, that really sets the stage for her to fig­ure most things out. They briefly play a much milder ver­sion of Thelma and Louise, do a sun-​​drenched road trip to a hos­pi­tal to see Leslie’s father, and then part com­pany, strangely enough, on the upswing.

I liked the film. A lot. I don’t think it’s as strong as 2046, which is a mas­ter­piece, as far as I’m con­cerned. Nor is it quite as good as the oth­ers I men­tion above. But it gets to you, creeps up on you, becomes more than just a pleas­ant diver­sion with beau­ti­ful visu­als. It’s really quite won­der­ful in the way it’s framed, the begin­ning and the end, the lost keys and the open doors and the let­ting go and the mov­ing on. What seems too sim­ple at first glance becomes not a mat­ter of sim­plic­ity at all but of lived and loved uni­ver­sals. And, though it is far from “real­is­tic”, there is a deeper truth to the movie that helps us let go, move on, give up our keys and go through yet another door on our way to .…

Related Posts

1. Blue­ber­ries and Brandi
2. Murakami’s Uncanny Doors of Perception