Über uns

„Eine ganze Welt öffnet sich diesem Erstaunen, dieser Bewunderung, Erkenntnis, Liebe und wird vom Blick aufgesogen.“ (Jean Epstein)

A Shadow that Speaks: Varastettu Kuolema by Nyrki Tapiovaara

“It’s nor­mal: when the cine­ma was “silent,” we were free to lend it all the noi­ses, the tiniest as well as the most inti­ma­te. It was when it set about tal­king, and espe­ci­al­ly after the inven­ti­on of dub­bing (1935), that not­hing remain­ed to chall­enge the vic­to­ry of dia­lo­gue and music. Weak, imper­cep­ti­ble noi­ses no lon­ger had a chan­ce. It was geno­ci­de.” – Ser­ge Daney, Cine­me­teo­ro­lo­gy

-

The new res­to­ra­ti­on of Nyr­ki Tapiovaara’s Vara­stet­tu kuo­le­ma hap­pen­ed wit­hout much noti­ce last year, released on DVD in Fin­land from a new digi­tal trans­fer, a res­to­ra­ti­on of the ori­gi­nal cut released thea­tri­cal­ly. Unavailable until now, it was then-cri­ti­cis­ed by the social-demo­cra­tic maga­zi­ne, Kult­tu­u­ri­skand­aa­li, for inclu­ding insert shots of deca­dent objects owned by two of the film’s prin­ci­pal cha­rac­ters. In 1954, 16 years later, the film was re-released with chan­ges made by Tapiovaara’s editor/​cinematographer, Erik Blom­berg. Blom­berg elec­ted to cut all the high ang­le and insert shots from the film for the reasons abo­ve, deeming them too extra­va­gant and inspi­red by a French Avant-Gar­de cine­ma irrele­vant to the film’s nar­ra­ti­ve of Fin­nish resis­tance figh­ters. Tapio­vaara couldn’t appro­ve of the­se edits, howe­ver, as he’d died two years after the film’s ori­gi­nal release fight­ing for Fin­nish inde­pen­dence in the Win­ter War of 1940.

-

Ope­ning with the machi­na­ti­ons of a covert, stu­dent-acti­vist prin­ting press, Robert (the film’s initi­al prot­ago­nist), leads his com­ra­des through the streets of Hel­sin­ki, befo­re being tail­ed by a con­stant­ly-loo­ming Rus­si­an force, attemp­ting to over­throw their grass­roots resis­tance against Soviet rule. Robert and his com­ra­des are eager to increase their par­ti­san efforts by trans­port­ing wea­pons to fel­low com­ra­des on the Russian/​Finnish front. Only the local arms-dea­ler, Jon­ni, stands in their way – offe­ring them wea­pons and pass­ports by way of black­mail, hol­ding Robert’s list of par­ti­san names as col­la­te­ral. Both par­ties are well-awa­re that Jonni’s the only fea­si­ble way of purcha­sing and trans­port­ing wea­pons out of the coun­try. If Robert and his par­ti­san cohort refu­se to buy Jonni’s wea­pons (with money that they don’t even have), the list of names will be released to Soviet aut­ho­ri­ties and they’ll be sent to death. Even still, they rebuff Jonni’s advan­ces and opt to trans­port the wea­pons them­sel­ves – but with few means to do so. The film’s cha­rac­ters are among one of two fac­tions: col­la­bo­ra­tors or dis­si­dents. The col­la­bo­ra­tors are made up of Jon­ni, Robert’s bour­geois fami­ly, the afo­re­men­tio­ned gen­dar­mes loo­ming among the spa­re Hel­sin­ki streets and their hig­her-up cza­rist offi­cers uner­rin­gly cha­sing down our leads in the film’s cli­max. The revo­lu­tio­na­ries are an even smal­ler group, pri­ma­ri­ly made up of Robert and his com­ra­des, Jonni’s for­mer accom­pli­ce Man­ja, a shoe­ma­ker who shel­ters Robert from the gen­dar­mes and the dis­pi­ri­ted trin­ket shop-owner with whom Robert covert­ly deals in black-mar­ket passports.

The film’s focus even­tual­ly shifts to Man­ja, one of the gre­at par­tisans I can recall in cine­ma. Upon mee­ting Robert, she turns his prin­ting press into an arms tra­ding post, flou­ting Jonni’s grip over her in the pro­cess. She helps Robert – with her know­ledge of Jonni’s wea­pons and their whe­re­a­bouts – to trans­port guns in coff­ins and haul ammu­ni­ti­on belts beneath her many hats and dres­ses. In this time, she’s now been ful­ly radi­cal­i­sed and still expe­ri­en­ces the majo­ri­ty of the film’s indi­gni­ties both first­hand and unde­ter­red. First­ly, she’s shun­ned to her face by Robert’s mother as a working-class wast­rel and – when run­ning a gun hid­den in a baby car­ria­ge – is swar­med by the gro­pes and advan­ces of a lur­king gen­dar­me offi­cer. Still, through her, both the film’s noir and melo­dra­ma­tic trap­pings mani­fest – then quick­ly meta­mor­pho­se bey­ond them­sel­ves and into a hig­her pur­po­se. When faced with the film’s poten­ti­al noir nar­ra­ti­ve, Man­ja the femme fata­le is sum­ma­ri­ly left behind by Man­ja the revo­lu­tio­na­ry. As the pri­ma­ry exam­p­le of this, when first left alo­ne with Robert, she descri­bes to him her upbrin­ging and life thus far: having been a seam­stress in rural Fin­land, she’s now ador­ned with shi­ny jewel­lery and tea gowns from Jon­ni (the same gowns she uses to trans­port guns), don­ning this bour­geois-col­la­bo­ra­tor faça­de with a sim­me­ring con­tempt. She then approa­ches Robert like the «femme fata­le», insi­nu­a­ted through her lon­ging glan­ces and the shadow-fil­led room they’re cast in. But this (addi­tio­nal) faça­de is undo­ne-then-re-estab­lished within the move­ment of their embrace, all for a grea­ter pur­po­se; that of her new­found revo­lu­tio­na­ry dri­ve, one she sees in Robert.

Wit­hout the bur­den of boy-meets-girl inner con­flicts or this bi-polar, femme fata­le per­so­na, she very rea­di­ly lea­ves Jon­ni short­ly after this encoun­ter and even more rea­di­ly kills him when kept from Robert in the final act. Though the­se femme-fata­le/l­ove inte­rest con­s­tructs are bypas­sed altog­e­ther, one can sen­se the spec­tres of their nar­ra­ti­ve con­s­tructs floa­ting through the film’s dar­kened palet­te: the glint of Manja’s ear­ring in a clo­se-up that mere­ly traces the out­line of her face in a sil­very light; the gla­ring white spot­light of a street­lamp that punc­tures through the pitch-black fabric of a night-time-set, over­head shot; the swin­ging light that sways over Jonni’s dead body, splay­ed atop his taxi­der­mied pan­ther – among the­se images, the film’s iri­de­s­cent whites burn with a grea­ter mys­tery than any­thing said or infer­red through con­ven­tio­nal nar­ra­ti­ve inci­dent or spo­ken dia­lo­gue. Tapio­vaara unders­tood, at a point when noir cine­ma was in its nas­cen­cy, that it’s the swi­pe of a hand, a sliver of light that reve­als an eye or the pas­sing of cur­ren­cy in clo­se-up that keeps a mys­tery ali­ve, not the nar­ra­ti­ves that inci­te it all.

Man­da­ted by the time and tech­ni­cal means, the abo­ve inci­dents are set to one of two sounds at any given moment: eit­her a tin­ny, inter­per­so­nal dia­lo­gue spo­ken in the film’s inte­ri­ors or a degra­ded-sound­ing orches­tra unders­coring the exte­ri­or set pie­ces (a bipar­ti­te limi­ta­ti­on set by its ear­ly post-sync sound, mon­au­ral sound­track). Tapio­vaara, by neces­si­ty most likely, wasn’t tempt­ed to over­whelm his film with over­dub­bed dia­lo­gue or foley work in a time when Northern/​Eastern Euro­pean cine­ma was first lear­ning how to speak. Set only to the orchestra’s swells, the film’s final set pie­ce reu­ni­tes Robert and Man­ja as they speed through in a car­ria­ge – machi­ne gun in tow – to a geta­way boat on the Finnish/​Russian bor­der. Man­ja is shot by the trai­ling gen­dar­mes and dies a slow death on the way to the­se Fin­nish bor­ders. Having been pil­fe­red, chea­ted, mas­quer­aded and used as a form of trans­por­ta­ti­on, a true death has mani­fes­ted through a sol­dier of the revo­lu­ti­on. As Robert clo­ses Manja’s eyes, the film fades to black, wit­hout an “end” title card. Eli­ding spo­ken and writ­ten text, there’s the sen­se in the film’s con­clu­si­on that there’s no time left for expl­ana­ti­ons and – as a result – no time for a film that speaks of a then-unfo­re­seen natio­nal inde­pen­dence; only time for one that shows it.