As my likely not really clever title may indicate, I have some mixed thoughts to share. I have partaken recently of two different artistic creations, one movie and one book, both of which left me wondering: at least one of them left me wanting more–maybe later. Okay, I’ll explain–or try.

“Afire” is a German film directed by Christian Petzold with whom I was not previously familiar. Since he was the director I think its appropriate to mention his name. I won’t bother with any of the actors or other technicians since I’ve never heard of any of them before and neither have you–likely, anyway. To give away the ending of my review a little bit, I ended up more or less liking this movie–I’d give it a B-. But it was a convoluted business involving a great deal of patience and the belief that something good was coming. Something was, but it took a fairly long time.

“Afire” takes place in northern Germany on the coast of the Baltic Sea, a fact that I gleaned from other reviews. I could tell there was a sea there but I did not know which one. It begins with two young friends, Felix and Leon, travelling by(unreliable)car to to Felix’s mother’s place on the coast which she has offered them as a good place to pursue their artistic endeavors. Felix is working on an art school portfolio and Leon is brooding over his second novel, newly “finished,” and hopes to see his publisher soon to find out if it’s a “go” as is.

Their trip is tiresome for them what with mechanical failures and getting lost, and at least as much so for the audience (those who share my tastes, anyway) listening to these two bicker and BS. But they finally make it to the place anyway where they surprisingly encounter Nadja, a lovely young woman who apparently was also offered the run of the place including a key by Felix’s generous mother.. In return she will look after the place–apparently. This is never made very clear in what I think is one of the movie’s weaknesses, though she is actually the best character in the film. Attractive, intelligent, psychologically and emotionally elusive, she is a counter point to the more-or-less normal Felix and the grumpy, brooding tiresome Leon.

Leon is immediately attracted to her, but he doesn’t really know how to make a move and anyway there’s the book and the publisher to think about. Apparently, Leon’s first novel was a success, which is a bit difficult to understand when you think of the guy himself and his apparent personal tendencies. Later we meet two other characters, Devid, apparently a lifeguard on vacation (or maybe just in between shifts) whose main purpose seems to be to have someone else in the movie. There does appear to be an infatuation between him and Felix but nothing much comes of it until the end when it turns tragic. The other one is Leon’s publisher, Helmut, who wants to go over the new novel and has a lot of comments and suggestions for the young author, none of them really praising him.

Meanwhile, we are reminded from time to time that there is a serious forest fire raging not too far away. There is the suggestion that this may have some kind of teleological meaning for the characters or at least bring them to greater awareness of a serious earth issue. This point is never really developed, but that’s OK, having it there in the background may be enough.

Now we come to the point where I need to state clearly my two main objections to the first 2/3 of the movie. Leon is a tiresome bore and shows almost no identification or empathy with anyone else. This apparently is not true, but this is how it seems for far too long before we see (or I saw, at least) anything else in him. I guess you could say that since he had one novel already published, he must have had something hidden in there. Manohla Dargis, lead critic for the NYT seemed to like the movie overall, but she did comment that they could have ripped off James Joyce and entitled it “Portrait of the Artist as a Young Douchebag.” Apparently, she has a higher tolerance for some people than I do. She liked the film more than I did, regardless of Leon.

The other complaint, already referred to, is that roughly the first 2/3 of the movie is, to give it the benefit of the doubt, not very exciting. Now I have often myself heard people complain that “nothing happens” in a movie I liked very much and I wondered what was with them. So maybe somebody will wonder that about me. But anyhow, that’s how it seemed.

According to Neely Swanson of Easy Reader News(no, like you I never heard of him or it before this)Petzold told someone that among his influences were American coming of age stories, a story by Chekov, and the French New Wave director, Eric Rohmer. Dargis mentions about the same thing, particularly Rohmer.

I remember Eric Rohmer , though I may have seen only two of his films–I know I saw “Chloe in the Afternoon.” and liked it immensely. I believe I also saw and liked as much as Chloe, “My Night at Maud’s(be careful what you assume from that ambiguous title). Anyway, I commend Rohmer and his huge number of films to your consideration. Swanson has a good point when he writes ” …unlike Rohmer, he (Petzold) doesn’t seem to have a view to articulate.” That is likely part of the trouble with that first 2/3 or so of the movie.

But the thing is that at a certain point, something changes. I cannot associate this with any particular event in the story, with one exception which I’ll get to. But the whole thing becomes more tightly done, or at least it seems to. The characters gain some feeling and gravitas and the eventual disposition of their characters and relationships becomes something you care about. From here on to the end it is an engrossing story of manners and morals and may even take a little bit of a whack at artistic integrity.

The one thing that may lead to the turnaround is the arrival on the scene of Helmut, the publisher. He insists on going over Leon’s novel more or less page by page and pointing out its many lackings, particularly when compared to his one earlier successful work. Helmut becomes an important character, though not too fully developed, not as much as I think would have been good, and with some loose ends. But he brings a hint of maturity and purpose into the story. I do not think this is by any means the whole reason for the turnaround in the movie, but it is clearly a part of it.

I will leave it to you to decide if you want to see this(assuming you can find it), but I would suggest that if you are serious movie fan and/or student of film you should try it. Petzold apparently has done better in the past and I think he’s likely to do much better in the future, particularly when I consider some of the “masters” he follows, particularly Rohmer. He was one of the best!

OK, so much for the movies–well, for that one, I mean. On to the books-well, make a beginning, at least. This is a questionable move because I am much more comfortable with reviewing movies than books. But I’ll give this one a shot somewhat later–Having worn out my attention span on “Afire” I’m going to have to rest it for awhile. The book is by Lorrie Moore, apparently a well established short-story writer and sometimes novelist, but not one previously known to me. Her book is “I Am Homeless if This Is Not My Home.”

I need to digest this novel further before go into it in detail. I was not familiar with Ms. Moore’s work before and I AM impressed, but not quite captivated.–Also, I am a bit confused. So hold on and I’ll try to get to her latest book(she’s been at it for 3 or 4 decades now)shortly, possibly after re-reading it or at least parts of it. For entertainment while I’m doing this, maybe I’ll watch more closely the Trump indictments and their attendant legal maneuvers. I know this sounds weird but in a perverted kind of way I think that will help my mind–not clear it exactly, but give it a moment of relaxation concentrating on the ridiculous rather than the erratically sublime.