A protagonist out of time
How many of us live in our own time? We live beyond the societal concerns and even physical and emotional care for our families, following own terms, moving with our own rhythm. The concept of time, having greater meaning in both the world of art and cinematography, has shaped around two identities for people. Even it has been shaped.
The one is our identity carrying responsibilities of society and our family; the other is ‘our ego’ enslaved by these obligations, beating their brains out to become real. To survive by rejecting from inner world and meeting others’ expectation is interpreted as a spiritual rejection and sacrifice of their time. Sacrifice in psychoanalysis is studied as an individual’s devotion to others and prioritization of their needs.
This subject is studied from several viewpoints in cinematography, and also finds its reflection in Azerbaijani cinema. Thus, one of the film directors is Huseyn Mehdiyev who approaches theory from different perspectives. Strange Time, a psychological drama film renowned for its intense atmosphere and distinctive colour palette, was released in 1996. Huseyn Mehdiyev, a member of the European Film Academy, is best recognized for his work as a cinematographer on praised films including “Window of Grief”, “Working Visit”, and “Grandfather of Our Grandfather’s Grandfather”.
However, it was the film Strange Time that distinguished Huseyn Mehdiyev as a filmmaker and brought him international recognition and awards beyond the borders. By reflecting human psychology and the values that derived from it with a wide-ranging viewpoint, the film articulates the inner world of the protagonist trapped in two distinct egos – selves – through the language of cinema. In the background of the father and son relationship, it encourages us to re-analyse the traditional perspectives referred to as national values. In addition, we examine intergenerational relationships, the status an individual carry throughout their domestic and social life. If you were Leila, what would you do?
In the first scene of the exposition, the director conveys the painful tone of the story by giving an impression of the father character (the protagonist hereafter called “a father”) as already dead in a wheelchair. In parallel, to visually express the protagonist’s internal and physical agonies, the camera is focused on small details by showing the pigeons released into the room and the polluted, dirty mattress. The shift in the colour palette—from colour to black and white—and the use of flashbacks highlight the origins of the events. Therefore, the film’s protagonist, played by Aladdin Abbasov, falls from a height while feeding pigeons, and is bound to a wheelchair.
Leila, the daughter, endures not only burden of her father who has lost his wife, but also tolerates his spoiled nature, pampered temperament and caprices.” The obligation to care for her father gradually isolates Leila from life, her surroundings and work. Eventually, it causes the separation from her beloved Orkhan. Though we see Orkhan beside Leila at the beginning of the film, her refusal to accept his proposal – unwilling to leave her father behind to marry him – expresses that she is compelled to face the ensuing crisis alone and is struggling with it. Dialogue – Orkhan, my father has never grasped brush and painted after my mom’s death – between the protagonists in the film interprets intergenerational difference. Presenting the relationship between the two protagonists in inverse proportion, the director implies that love among the new generation is heavenly and the lovers’ hearts are distant from the temple.
The director seemingly evaluates the measure of the future sacrifice by showing the protagonist’s life before his confinement to home or lockdown—his violin performances in the orchestra at his romantic moments with Orkhan – and other scenes. Stepping aside momentarily, I would also like to point out that, despite everyone’s glance without pausing, the cinematographer focuses lens on Leila’s tearful and ceaseless performance of the violin in close-up framing. By this camera technique, it can be interpreted as “music and self-expression”. The director places the protagonist in the story and the audience beyond the screen – in a state of dilemma. To live in her own time by refusing her father? To sacrifice one’s time and life for an aging father? In the film’s climactic scene, this question is responded by the father, as a third person, making attempt to suicide. In this endeavour, he objects to Leila living his lifetime. Although I deem that the protagonist’s dilemma (choosing her father) is humane, led to a wider contemplation of cinema on a global scale.
Her aggressive reaction – “What’s wrong with his daughter? What happened to his home?” – to the caregiver who withdraws from her responsibility to look after her father and suggests sending him to a nursing home indicates that her views are alien to Eastern cultural values. For instance, in The Father (2020), as an example of Western culture, screened by Florian Zeller, the relationships between a mentally deteriorated father and his caregiving daughter unfold differently from the perspective of cultural values and traditions. Comparing the technical and artistic aspects of the film, it is essential to first underscore the intercultural differences through an artistic approach. The father’s placement in a nursing home after being abandoned by his daughter in the film The Father is presented as a typical occurrence. Comparing two films, it is worth emphasizing that the film The Father outperforms Strange Time in terms of portraying both the psychological depth of the father and the caregiver.
We witness the cognitive dissonance of her father suffering from Alzheimer’s disease. While acknowledging his justified stance, we also see the drama of the daughter, subjected to humiliation and transformed before her father’s eyes into a stranger whom she no longer recognizes. We understand her decisions to be made”.
The viewer sees the film Strange Time through Leila’s perspective. Her father’s psychological depth or inner world, and her love for birds remain shrouded in mystery. As Anne looks after her father and witnesses his gradual isolation, she starts seeking a way out to improve her welfare. Unlike Orkhan, her husband, upon witnessing Anne’s anguish, offers to hospitalize her father. At this time, it is important to highlight that if Leila had placed her father in a nursing home in the film Strange Time, the society would have severely criticized her and challenged tradition. Whereas, in the film The Father, the fact that the daughter abandons her father and places in a nursing home is more acceptable from the context of social life.
Poetic manifestation of the inner crisis, actors’ performance, cinematographic synthesis of psychological nuances makes the film an exception for Azerbaijani cinema. Taking into account that Huseyn Mehdiyev also served as a director of photography, his distinctive touch in cinematography is noticeable. Static camera shots in the father’s room, the reflection of camera’s focus on the protagonist, details and symbolic imagery facilitates the viewer’s ability to emphasize with the protagonist. One of the advantages of the film Strange Time involves details and symbolism in messages. For example, the doves that the father tormented and trapped in the room are a metaphor for Leila and her captivated freedom. The wall clock, which constantly shows the same time, indicates that time has frozen and no one lives according to their temporal rhythm. Both Leila and the pigeons inhabit a strange time. One of the metaphoric details applied in films is the mirror. In the film Strange Time, Leila’s weary and somewhat aged visage reflected in the mirror causes perplexity firstly, which is followed by a sense of regret. The mirror symbol expresses the perplexity of the protagonist burdened by internal conflicts while processing his self-awareness. Concurrently, Leila’s relationship with neighbour can be understood as a moral betrayal of her father and the obligations she owes him. As the film ends, the father passes away following a bird attack and the footage switches from to black-white to coloured scene. Though colour grading of the footage signifies Leila’s revival – return to life, the visibility of only half the wall clock and the blurriness of the other half express that Leila’s lifespan is halfway over. It’s not for nothing that “to take care of a patient can cause one to suffer more than the patient”.
Elza Akhundova