an open book
by Douglas Messerli
Earl W. Wallace and William Kelley
(screenplay, based on a story by Kelley, Wallace and Pamela Wallace), Peter
Weir (director) Witness / 1985
That immersion into a different time and space occurs quite by accident,
as an 8-year-old Amish boy, Samuel (the wide-eyed Lucas Haas), whose father has
just died, travels with his mother, Rachel Lapp (Kelly McGillis) to visit her
sister. Stranded in the train station in Philadelphia, the young Samuel
witnesses a murder of an undercover police officer in the bathroom. John Book,
assigned to the case, tries to query the boy, showing him pictures of criminal
possibilities and even brutally taking him to a lowlife area of town to have
the boy encounter a noted trouble-maker. Back in the police station, the
frightened boy is forced to look through books and books of criminal figures in
the hopes that he may recognize the murderer. When Book is momentarily
distracted by a phone call, the curious Samuel wanders off, only to look into a
bookcase showcasing major events of the police department. There, observing an
old photograph, the startled boy points to a figure, narcotics officer James
McFee (Danny Glover). In Weir’s brilliant direction of this scene, nothing is
said; Book simply catches the look on the boy’s face and the accusing finger
and quietly leads him and his mother away, putting them up secretly in his
sister’s apartment, realizing he has stumbled upon a deep corruption rotting
away the very world in which works. A call to his superior, Sergeant Elton
Carter (Brent Jennings) soon results in Book’s near-murder, forcing him
suddenly to ask his partner to get rid of the files, while Book, borrowing his
sister’s car, speeds away with Rachel and her son back into the anonymity of
her secretive community. He arrives only to pass out, near death from the
shots.
The intrusion of an outsider into their world momentarily terrifies the
Amish elders, who insist that Book should be taken to a hospital in order to
survive. When he, in turn, makes it clear that hospitalization will only lead
the evil men to him and, ultimately, to Rachel and the boy, they call in their
own doctor. Through home remedies, prayer, and pure stubbornness on Book’s
part, he survives. And so begins a new story, in which he becomes immersed in
the unknown Amish world while falling illicitly in love with Rachel—and, one
should add, her son—both of which cause enmity between him and a local
neighbor, Daniel Hochleitner (played, surprising well, by dancer Alexander
Godunov).
The tension, accordingly, mounts, as the
love the two feel must be rejected at the same time we witness the villains
trying their best find the family and close in. In the end, Book’s very nature,
his violence, leads the corrupt policemen to him. When mocked by tourists on a
trip to town, the Amish men patiently and pacifically put up with the taunts,
while Book goes ballistic, striking the assailants. It is the difference
between the so-called “civilized” response (that of the police force) and the rural,
religious (“uncivilized”) lack of response, both going by the book of their own
cultures, that makes it clear that John Book cannot remain in this place. He is
a man of the law, not of the Lord.
Book realizes he must leave, waving to the beautiful Rachel and her son,
and even to Hochleitner as he passes by, making it clear that Daniel may now
court Rachel in the Amish way.
Yes, parts of this film seem to pat, too well-written and unbelievable.
At other moments, the work gives in to easy sentiments arguing for the local
and simple world over the complexities of urban living. Like Book, I could
never survive in the paradise that Weir has made of Lancaster County. For
years, as a commuter between Washington, D.C. and Philadelphia during the very
year in which this film was shot, I saw all sorts of illegal and illicit
behavior in the very bathroom where the innocent boy witnessed the brutal
murder of the first scenes of this film. And I grew up in a land of “waving
grains.” Like Book, I recognize I am a born-urbanite who longs, still at times,
for the false ideal, for the peace of a rural idyll, for a quiet family life.
Don’t we all, at moments, Weir’s film tantalizingly asks, want something in
which we could never participate? But most of us also realize that the two
worlds can never be resolved, which is why Weir’s lovely fable is so utterly
fascinating.
The Amish simply wanted to be left alone, to become, metaphorically
speaking, a closed book, uninterrupted; while John Book, is just that, an
ordinary open book, easily read by all whom he encounters, a man desperately on
the search for justice and love.
Los Angeles, March, 14, 2016
Reprinted from World Cinema Review (March 2016).
No comments:
Post a Comment