Janus Contemporaries: Afire

[DarkImbecile]

Trailer

[Walter Kurtz]

Things That Make Life Worth Living, Vol. 162

Paula Beer in a Christian Petzold film.

[Ribs]

Sideshow and Janus Films have acquired Christian Petzold's Afire

[therewillbeblus]

Christian Petzold's Afire is his best work since at least Phoenix, and perhaps Gespenster. It's also handily his funniest film - at once a deviation from his more pronounced fables and a refurbished version of that model. Thomas Schubert's Leon joins his friend Felix for what he anticipates will be a quiet weekend away to finish his second manuscript, only to be continuously bombarded with unexpected guests whose behaviors -along with Felix's congenial demeanor- trigger his own insecurities. But this isn't a tale about a well-meaning guy being intruded upon by malicious or disrespectful stimuli - it's more of a case study in solipsism, as if Sartre's No Exit was adapted into a version of La Collectionneuse where a lone misanthropic, cowardly introvert contends with a milieu of genuinely kind, peppery people.

It's a wry social satire full of subtleties, relying on Petzold's greatest skill as a director of actors. Per usual, the script itself isn't as strong as the cumulative effect Petzold achieves with his typical understated style. He patiently and confidently issues control over the pace and details of the material and players to morph banalities into magic. The cast is wonderful - perfectly underplaying nuances of complex, familiar social dynamics - and it's in the slow burn of a 'too-curious-to-be-cruel' organic approach on Petzold's part that transcends cringe comedy, and allows Leon to be seen as both repellent and sympathetic. Leon is not a hero or a villain, but a relatable character - at least for those of us who have ever felt incapable of matching the energy of the extroverts surrounding us, afraid to take social risks, and who project the resentment from one's own avoidance onto those we wish we could be more like, deluding ourselves into despising. The film does not settle into becoming the 'introvert's nightmare', but holds that perspective alongside the alternative: that Leon is a drag to those enjoying life, and rather pathetic and frustrating to 'outward-focused' people who can see the world as bigger than them.

And that scale of myopia is really the theme here, expressed with the objective observational rhythms of the face-value narrative, and allegorically with the fires emulating the romantic yearnings of the writer - to be a participant and live the life of simplicity in pleasure that his peers seem to be able to, not burdened by his own self-constructed barriers of low self-esteem. Petzold carefully -almost invisibly- plays with Paula Beer's role, simultaneously as the 'enigmatic woman' and an authentic good person giving rope to a man who humanistically deserves it in her eyes, but maybe doesn't in his own. Is she enigmatic because he can't let her in, helplessly incapable of seeing beyond his own self-absorption? And then what of the final shot? The man loves to end with subverted-climaxes in interpersonal exchanges, and this one may be surprisingly uplifting, depending on how you read it - but either way, it refutes a lesser film's clean endpoint of satire with earnestness and promise.

She can also represent the fable's vehicle of a muse, but the function she serves as the polar opposite of that role is cheeky, and might emulate Leon's own skewed perspective that flees from intimacy, barring her from becoming anything other than a threat; or a reminder that we don't 'deserve' success just because we will it and are sensitive to discomfort. The neutrality of Petzold's film is interesting, especially when one interprets the meaning behind some fatal turns. Is it that life doesn't discriminate, or reward morality; that life is unfair and perhaps there's a logic to participants' activity yielding bountiful existential returns but risking more consequentially, in contrast to the avoidant person's more secure positioning? I'm not so sure. Reflecting on the film, I believe there's an optimism at the end of this scathing and sensitive portrait: that it's never too late to get outside of self, see peripherally, and rebound from the failures inherent in an existence of incessant self-centered fear. Though we need warm, good people around us to help us get there. The world isn't a cold, dark place, but a fire-y one - and not just in its literal destructiveness (which can be necessary for creation; clearly an element of this fable). It's romantic, meaningful, and full of ubiquitous opportunities to grow and change and be better if we open our eyes to see them.

Yes, the message of 'no risk, no life' is there - but the risks don't have to be drastic. This film embodies such tangible, basic, everyday risk. It shows characters who engage and those who don't, and all that happens to them isn't rooted in a moral model, because most stuff that happens to us is outside of our control and random. But the film celebrates that some suffering can be alleviated with intentional action and personal work, and pitches its focus there - because that empowerment matters in a vacuum, and even tragedy is hardly a tragedy here if one lived full and bright while they could. This film has a lot to show, and I loved its restrained, beautiful punchline at the end of a cryptic comedy of manners.

[therewillbeblus]

Janus page for Afire, Petzold

Awesome, Afire is Petzold's best film in a while, and will benefit from extras to help dissect the rich subtext

[Walter Kurtz]

afire pretty much guaranteed to be released at some point and probably not the cheapo line either
petzold in the closet picking plastic
beer interviewed by indiewire at the crit offices

ps: cp at la los feliz q and a this aft

[therewillbeblus]

Yeah, plus someone posted a month ago that Janus has it

[therewillbeblus]

Afire (Christian Petzold) – You know you’re going to get impeccable filmmaking with Petzold, but the surprise here is that this is by far his funniest film, about a grumpy writer struggling to complete (or not complete) his difficult second novel among people who are just too fucking cheerful. The film has its dark side, of course. The only thing that kept this out of the top tier for me was the predictability of the climax and denouement.

SpoilerShow

Does anybody watching this not expect somebody to get caught in the offscreen forest fire? And for that person to be whoever decides to finally go and rescue the (offscreen) car? And from the moment we learn of the presence of an interloper at the cabin, isn’t if obvious that the real second novel will be the story of this interlude?

I agree with your assessment of its strengths, though the predictable elements you highlight didn't bother me so much, especially if viewing this as a fable about a self-absorbed, misanthropic individual locating the tools to elevate from beyond his myopia.

SpoilerShow

I found it cheekily reflexive to sacrifice the self-actualized characters, and allow the protagonist-of-the-film (who desperately but undeservingly vies to become the protagonist of life, and be central to his peers' stories… but who also fears this role and avoids opportunities to do so, caught in a trap of his own making) to 'become' the protagonist and write the story! It's a knowingly egocentric move by Petzold to manipulate the narrative towards these fatalistic ends, and I wonder how much of his own parts (after all, we all have a relationship with egocentricity) he's bringing into this, from both an artist and human standpoint.

However, it also makes sense under the structure of the fable and Paula Beer's enigmatic vehicle. Of course she's going to be the one to help others actualize and show the man who needs the lesson the way. And perhaps the characters who are self-actualized get 'off-ed' because, under the logic of a fable, they are representative of the peripheral sacrifices that are required for the one in need of the lesson to learn it - though, again, keeping the narrative focused on the averse loner and then escalating it to marginalize the existentially-successful characters right off the page creates a whiplash effect, pronouncing the solipsism plaguing our own narratives.

I think Petzold admirably incorporates the predictable events with a 'Life's not fair' lesson alongside empowering egocentricity, because the randomness of events imposes both validation and humility onto the protagonist. Only once he's offered the opportunity to actualize his skills through a forced rapture to his bubble of solipsism, and hold his low self-esteem next to his drive to be worthy, does he begin to shed that egocentricity. Being spared in the fire would cause a lesser character to endorse their narcissistic self in a lesser film, but here Petzold allows it to unveil for him what we've known all along - that, deep down, this guy knows he's not that important and is creating his own barriers to happiness, and needs to get out of his own way for change to occur. Ironically arriving here by writing about a tragedy that's been predictable to everyone watching this but him only self-reflexively emphasizes his original presenting problems and growth, and finally aligns us with him as a surrogate.

The strategy also, in a twist of dark absurdism, demonstrates how we rely on others to help ourselves gain distance from the self-perpetuated obstacles blocking our growth - though it doesn’t all have to be dark and certainly not tragic forever, as the final shot beautifully conveys.

Fables are inherently predictable, so I had no problem with these elements so long as they were used to serve the themes, and I think Petzold found a very interesting and novel way to do that.

[swo17]

Just realizing that Criterion teased a release of Afire more than six years ago:

SpoilerShow

Club sandwich and a hot (afire?) cup of goulash

[furbicide]

Great write-ups above, twbb. I only caught this – my first Petzold film – a fortnight ago at the Melbourne International Film Festival, and felt similarly about the sophisticated and sensitive depiction of its main character.

At first I found myself idly imagining an English-language remake with David Mitchell and Robert Webb in the roles of Leon and Felix, though of course this ends up being something quite different from the Peep Show-style black comedy it appears to be at first. And much of that comes down to Paula Beer’s character and performance, which felt incredibly relatable and plausible, effectively portraying the uncomfortable and at times bitter dynamic between a kind person who wants to help and an unhappy person who can’t resist biting their outstretched hand. It’s an excellent choice to represent that dynamic primarily from Leon’s perspective – it’s rare that we see that kind of character and those kinds of feelings represented this way in cinema.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Saw at blu-ray.com that it was under Janus/Criterion- so it's great to see it upcoming on Criterion.
It looked to me like something between François Ozon's "Swimming Pool" (for the book; sexual tension, "reality"...) and perhaps Eric Rohmer's "La Collectioneuse".
I'm in love with Paul Beer since I saw her in François Ozon's "Frantz". I was in love enough to see her in a French submarine movie with François Civil. Did not love "Transit", but love a lot "Undine" (again with Paula Beer and with a German Joachim Phoenix).
This kind of "reality" "unreality" syndrome was already in the first Petzold movie I saw in French TV years ago with Nina Hoss (I hope that it will be release one day on Blu-Ray) : "Yella" it reminded me "Carnival Of Sounds" with tinnitus ("Water On Glass" (Kim Wilde).
The character of Leon does not seem to "belong" to the movie (even to the cast). I really appreciated that everything is more or less from his perspective; thus, Paula Beer's character seems very subtle depending on the mood of Leon and his way to contemplate her; sometimes she seems contemptuous, intrigued by him, attracted perhaps; hence a very subtle acting by Paula Beer.

But if there was an essential addition to the Petzold in the Criterion collection I would choose instead "Barbara".

Regarding the fire - well, these days, things have changed and the movie is not unrealistic about the fire scene; because this happens in a lot of countries now; and people are staying and will find it more "common" (because it happens regularly, every summer) rather than running away if it was 10 years ago.
That's a bit frightening to say the least.
Because it's not like in "Les Combattants" (a kind of poetic/romantic ending using the fire scene, and there was a funny dialogue about Covid before Covid where Madeleine Beaulieu (aka Adèle Haenel) turned out to be wrong about what would happen the next years for us).
No really, now there are some movies which starts with some slight "details" of what would happen *next* : I'm thinking about Cronenberg's "Infinity Pool" (the squad "attach" on the beach), and the red paint at the beginning of Michel Franco's New Order. But both are dystopic or SF movies, not supposed to be happened now - in our reality. What is really frightening is in both movies "Infinity Pool" and "New Order"; for New Order this is the first sign of a class-rebellion and "new order", whereas here in Petzold movie, this is our reality.

[therewillbeblus]

Yes, it's interesting to set a parable within a more 'realistic' scenario, but still use mythic devices like Paula Beer's Nadja and

SpoilerShow

posturing at an apocalyptic conclusion, before paring back.

Petzold is at his best when he balances artificial schemes with realistic events/psychosocial examinations. A primary reason why I think this can be argued as his most accomplished film is in how Petzold bests himself by reflexively emulating the protagonist's own defense mechanisms, which are looked at with a curious sympathy but still gently challenged, never coddled or endorsed with blended empathy. There's a stark, darkly humorous irony when the realistic events surrounding the end are set up as a mythic contrivance, and in some ways the unrealistic element is the protagonist's obstinate vision of the world revolving around him. We often need loud reminders to sober us to objective truths, and the framing of a realism as exaggerated machinations only supports this perspective as emanating from an avoidant, solipsistic, modern troglodyte.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Yes, somehow it belongs to a trilogy he started with Undine but it's not that obvious in this movie; despite the "clue"/"hint" in the dialogues during the movie, the poem quote, the final book; etc... the Pompeii reference (oh, he did not play "Echoes" by Pink Floyd - in all past movies Paul Beer listen to "Staying Alive" (in Undine) or this French-touch-kind of slow-beat ambient music)
The thing is that now, in our real world (if this still means something now); the fire context is a reality now in many countries and less poetic than Petzold's movie.
For instance I think that "Les Combattants" works just fine now; after all these years (it's not the told but times pass so quickly); same for "La Virgen de Agosto" by Jonás Trueba (you have the high temperatures context but it ends in a fantasy and mythologic way too) (this one is sadly missed on blu-ray in even country even Spain; a Criterion release would have been so great! especially with his next movie, almost a short one with Covid-era)

[therewillbeblus]

Undine might be the most overt mythic film in his catalog, but it's been going on longer. I was thinking of Phoenix as the best point of comparison regarding its realist sincerity and carefully balanced approach rendering the fabled elements almost invisible.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Do you think that this will end in Janus Contemporaries, not Criterion "standard", thus, with at best an interview of C.Petzold; that's all.?

[Walter Kurtz]

50/50. Janus because it's so recent. Criterion because both Petzold and Beer were in the Criterion office a few months back.

[swo17]

Most of the Janus Contemporaries releases include at least an interview as an extra

[Walter Kurtz]

Well of course. In fact ALL of the Janus line includes an interview with the filmmaker(s). Only 17% of them include anything (human) cast-related. So I guess I should have said the 50% Janus estimation is actually 58.5% ((.17 * 50) +.50)... making my two second happy-hour bar-napkin calculation of 50/50 a more considered 58.5/41.5.

[goblinfootballs]

I would guess the fact that this is Janus/Sideshow would indicate Janus Contemporaries.

[swo17]

Well of course. In fact ALL of the Janus line includes an interview with the filmmaker(s). Only 17% of them include anything (human) cast-related. So I guess I should have said the 50% Janus estimation is actually 58.5% ((.17 * 50) +.50)... making my two second happy-hour bar-napkin calculation of 50/50 a more considered 58.5/41.5.

If we're going to resort to math, since the launch of Janus Contemporaries, what percentage of brand new films have been announced for Criterion's main line?

[Walter Kurtz]

I'm 60% in agreement with you and you're bitching about the other 40%? I'm not even 100% certain there is no deity. Since when did mathematics become elitist?

[therewillbeblus]

Probably not wise to hire the main character from Afire as one of your interns

[Walter Kurtz]

I couldn't agree more even though I felt sorry for him. It's impossible to be a good writer until you learn to have empathy.

[Walter Kurtz]

... and abolish certainty.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Do you know by the way (I have checked imdb.com and found no answer...) if on "Undine" I am the only one to hear during the café scene (the first opening scene) the soundtrack (the main theme) of François Truffaut "La Peau Douce" by Georges Delerue (it's quickly "buried" by some church bells) and I did not find it credited in the movie. The rest of the soundtrack is n"original" piano theme composed for "Undine".
After all that would make sense as Léaud's character in Day For Night said "c'est une tragédie et comme toute tragédie les personnages vont jusqu'au bout de leur destin". That would applied to Undine too.