“we may mention or allude to a thing, but not express it.” Jorge Luis Borges

“a thing is a thing, not what is said of the thing” Quote on Riggin Thomsen’s dressing room mirror.

The quote above  was fished out of the opening frames from this month’s flick. It announces the evening’s match up, ordinary reality vs. fame. Through that lens we’ll catch a glimpse of what the main character is aiming at and perspective for his transformation in the end. The subtitle of the movie is “The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance.” The question we must divine for ourselves is, whose ignorance? His, hers, or ours?

Forging onward in this series called “Films of Our Enemies,” we rack focus on a recent hit by a Hispanic that lots of us consider hip. But even if his films don’t meet your test, or if to equate ticket sales, with love, is too much of a stretch, his list of top awards alone shall amply attest, Antonio G. Iñaratu has made six outstanding features and each one exceeds the last.

I don’t know if he’s a US citizen now, or if Iñarratu’s work permit must constantly be renewed. He’s made movies here more than anywhere else, but Z Films, of which he is the founder, happens to be one of that country’s largest motion picture companies. As a result, cultural enrichment and monetary benefit are being appreciated on both sides of the border.

He was born, raised and made his name in Mexico City, yet we love this man and he loves us. His films have grossed over a quarter billion in the U.S. Are we going to resent this Mexicano working in our country when what he is creating such a win/win? Just as importantly, his artistry enjoys worldwide renown. Most importantly, while there has been all this talk of erecting a wall between us, Iñarratu’s work piles up reason-upon-reason to leave it down.

Iñarratu’s not some special case, no, not even close. We could dedicate years to extolling the virtues of Mexican artists and crafts persons working in el Norte since we became its host.  And their native ancestors made huge strides for all of us here before we arrived. While we watch this current, 21st century work of cinematic fine art, let’s be open to how Iñarratu’s craft makes us appreciate the entire collective soul and history of Latin America as part of what we call home.

We can’t just suddenly say to the Mexican people, ok, we’ve absorbed your artists, cuisine, sportsman, musicians, etc. Now, go away and leave us alone. There are things we couldn’t imagine living without that Mexico has bestowed on our country. Not just material things, I mean great veins of common sense, abundance of agreeable natures and motherloads of mindful routines, some kind of sweat equity that is handed down by people living in one place for generations.

People are the source of those riches. If you push away those people, the culture they left behind will disintegrate. It won’t be the same. Flavors will soon loose their taste. The thing will be lost that attracted us in the first place.

In his fifth film, “Birdman,” Iñarratu’s stature as a storyteller attains new heights, thanks to a gifted group of players and an infectiously out-of-the-box-office approach. It’s a dark comedy about art and fame paraded as a legit stage product (concealed in a hit screenplay). It’s a comic book hitched to a literary work, too, by the way. With its gag-on-gag pile-up, kinesthetic camera eye and impeccable, hectic pace, conventions of the “madcap” genre are fulfilled to the last frame, where they are, finally, literally, tossed out the window.

The director may be jabbing at the beast that made him millions, but mainly he takes aim at the flaws in all of us that breed and feast on fame. Witness that much and more, in this thundering, bounding, stalking, single-take fable of a down and out clown’s reincarnation, from dying blockbuster idol to avant-guardian angel, during the opening of a nerve-fraying Broadway debut.

From the opening cards, Antonio Sanchez’s shimmery, pressurized drum track becomes something reminiscent of the accompaniment to a high wire act. And that’s no accident. Almost everything about this production feels like a wildly timed stunt.

By the way, if you become intrigued as I did, with drummer Sanchez, dial in “Migration” (2007) combining Sanchez’s skills with the likes of Chick Corea, Pat Metheny, Chris Potter and Christian McBride. He’s also done a bit of touring with the film, supplying the drum work live, in house. He’ll be bringing it at the Rafael Film Center on February 18, 2017. An experience not to be missed if you ever get the chance.

Back to the film, Sandoval makes maximum use of his kit to accompany Riggin Thomsen’s passage from epiphany to catastrophe and back in three acts. What better sound could back this acrobatic panic attack than a drummer, solo riffing, to the camera’s hyper-vigilant track?

This was a clever choice, pairing a single musical instrument with the single take stunt like this, providing combustive thrust to all the rest. Syncopations somehow help nail down the moment. Something seems to be constantly whipped into foment. The storyline turns on dime-after-dime, hilariously, as plot twist after plot twist, like so many gags, are set up on one beat and smacked home the next.

Extended talk sequences seem anything but long, covered as they are, like prizefights, bounding with camera feats and authentic fist-a-cuffs, both hand-held and locked-down, goosing it constantly with inventive pans, radical trucking shots, impossible push-throughs, soaring crane moves; all sorts of acrobatic treats for the eyes, punctuated by that irregular, punchy rumble, crash, addictive smack bam boom in the ears. This film is crammed with virtuoso cinematic stunts and tour de force slights of lens.

CONTINUES NEXT MONTH

“The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance.” What more apt headline for our times?

Any clip of film, or video, captured with hand-held cameras, or body-mount is, first and foremost, the document of the operator’s physical grace. In the movie “Birdman” an artist by the name of Chris Harhoff wore the Steadicam. His physical fitness, plus his brain’s command of eye, hand and foot, motored by his heaving, spirit-fueled frame, is built in to this entire film. By the way, did you realize it is that comic book hero Birdman that originates at the source of our omniscient point-of-view? The director and DP determined this to be the way to tell this tory most effectively. The most effective way was certainly not the easiest, in this case. Everyone involved pushed it to the max to pull off the real-time feel that “Birdman,” manages to put across.

It may be hard for us to imagine how skillfully the director and actors worked with the technicians, behind-the-scenes, to have their interactions weave in such fluid choreography. The finished product makes it look so easy. The action is made up of one single, seamlessly spun, high-charged, ever-shifting, travelling dialog sequence; from taboo romance, up on the roof of the theater, to the revolving door of actors constantly entering and exiting its stage and backstage, to the, hungover cheek-to-concrete reality-check, doggin’ Riggin Thomson in the street at the dawn of opening night day.

Riggin Thomson’s saga offers some comic relief for my own mid-life disonance. For dudes past fifty, this film’s main character achieves close to universal resonance. Boomers, most of us having physically peaked by this age, are doing some heavy reevaluating during our fifth and sixth decades. Here, this prima donna-past-his-prime’s life suddenly doesn’t look so different from mine. Poor Riggin. I have felt the same way as he, in front of my own reflection. Or, when he is shamed for not having a presence on Twitter.

Essentially, the movie allows us to eavesdrop, for three days, on the same lines of sight of this Birdman comicbook action character, who is following around this famous actor, Riggin Thomson, harassing him into making Birdman 4. Meanwhile, Riggin tries to rehabilitate himself as an artist by writing, directing and starring in a Broadway hit, adapted from a very serious piece of American lit. As it goes with pop media driven notoriety, the line between the man and the creature he’s impersonating is blurring.

But, to analyze all the themes that echo and fugue throughout “Birdman” would take a good many servings. Hither, brews a controversy over what constitutes art and who’s its authority. Yonder, weaves a crisis between preoccupied father and wounded daughter. Coincidentally, there is relevant comparisons to be made pertaining to our current quantum shift in politics. Fame was something Riggin Thomson uses to leverage a legitimate career in the American theater. Ironically, it turns out, the same trick gets entertainers into to politics.

I’m drawn back, once again, to that conspicuous phrase on Riggin’s dressing room mirror. A thing is a thing, not what is said of the thing. That almost identical quote spoken of in the previous post is attributed to the author JL Borges, “we may mention or allude to a thing but not express it.” His English translation of “Labyrinths” provides a cameo in “Birdman.” Ed Norton’s character clutches a copy while browning his skin under a tanning lamp. It’s the same book that the actor protects himself with, like a shield, against Riggin Thomson’s indignant slaps after a particularly bad rehearsal mishap. Among the many other conclusions one could draw from finding Borges embedded in Innaratu’s comic opus, we are confronted with two dazzling latin american intellects. And there are so many to chose from. Whether it be La Cucaracha, Carlos Santana, Montezuma or La Guadalupana, most of us whites in the United States, consciously or otherwise, have admired someone from Latin America. It’s an historic love affair, we share with the browner nations. You need proof? We like the Mexican so much so that we artificially tan our skin in imitation.

Iñarratu spins an ornately plotted web, like Borges did in his “Labyrinths”. For example La Escritura del Dios, is a six page short in “Labyrinths” that zooms out so fast, the end renders what went before as almost incidental. The ending of “Birdman – The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance,” seems to give us the same slip, when Riggin, instead of being pulled back into his life by his sudden, unimaginable success, is drawn beak-first, out the window, to the sky where, we assume, by following his daughter’s gaze, we’re tracking some newborn bird, trying out his new wings. His daughter chuckles, as the last scrap of dialog in the fade-to-black firmament of this film’s finale. It sounds positively carefree.