Eyes Wide Open (Tabakman, 2009)

Last updated on: January 7, 2015 at 8:08 pm by Kenneth R. Morefield

Eyes Wide Open (Tabakman, 2009) 2015-01-07T20:08:24-05:00 Kenneth R. Morefield

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Eyes Wide Open

When presented with a direct, perfunctory question about whether or not his film’s subject–a homosexual affair between two orthodox Jewish men–is “taboo,” director Haim Tabakman gives an equally direct and frank answer:

Yes, of course [the film’s subject is taboo]. Some people from the religious world helped us, but no one wanted to be credited or thanked as advisers… There is really strong negative energy associated with this subject. If you want to be part of the orthodox

world, there is no way to settle this conflict. If you are inside this world, homosexuality is not accepted

As a testament to the intractable nature of the conflict between the forces of orthodoxy and those of self-acceptance, Eyes Wide Open is effective enough. That it lacks the power (for this viewer) of Avi Nesher’s The Secrets (Ha-Sodot) can perhaps be chalked up to the cipher-like nature of the characters breaking the taboo. Tabakman calls both characters “strong,” but concedes that Aaron is a “closed person” while saying that Ezri’s defining characteristic is his “anger.” It is quite possible to create a film about closed people that still engages the audience–Martin Provost’s Seraphine comes to mind–but to do so means, I think, giving us some sense of a character’s inner world that we can share. We are observers first and last in Eyes Wide Shut, and while the “first” part doesn’t bother me, the “last” does.

The film also invites comparison to Sandi Simcha Dubowski’s Trembling Before G-d, a documentary chronicling the attempts of Orthodox and Hasidic gays and lesbians to articulate the degree to which their religious community’s rejection of their sexual orientation effects them. That Dubowski’s film is now almost a decade old (it was nominated for the Grand Jury Prize at Sundance in 2001) gives special poignancy to Tabakman’s articulation of what he hopes his film can achieve:

I really want to help break the silence, to break the taboo in ultraorthodox

society. The film can be part of the evolution of the orthodox world.

The way religious people live now is not the way Jerusalem has always been.

It is a reaction to the fear of losing part of their traditions. In the end, we are

dealing with human beings, not with sins. There is a way to convince people,

through movies, without using force to say: “Look, this exists.” And the first

time somebody says: “I know, it exists”, we win! Just to recognize it exists is

better than not existing at all.

The seeming paradox between “there is no way to settle this conflict” and “the film can be part of the evolution of the orthodox world” is one I had a hard time reconciling. Even as a straight viewer, I’m not sure if it is simply enough to say “look, this exists.” Perhaps, too, there is an air of “more put upon than any other” that pervades such comments and the film–one which I can’t help but wonder if gays in fundamentalist Christian or Muslim communities would find arrogant, and one which I can’t help but note excludes the experiences of lesbians altogether because women in general appear to be incidental not just to the plot of the film but to the society it depicts.

This is not to say that Eyes Wide Open is a bad film. One does not get invited to Cannes simply by smashing taboos. The film is directed with a measured, careful precision that nudges viewers towards what cannot be spoken. The script is very literate, with ample use of visual motifs–when we first see Aaron he is prying open a steel security shield around his butcher shop–and rhetorical, poetic ambiguity. “I didn’t bring it into our home,” Aaron says to his wife, an example of the sort of plain speech that must bear the weight of nuance to communicate what cannot be talked openly about.

Perhaps because of my own desires for a film that speaks to how we are the same as much as how we are different, it was Tabakman’s handling of the theme of hubris that resonated most deeply with me. In initially rejecting Ezri’s advances, Aaron constructs a coherent but ultimately futile theological meaning for his own inclinations. “Ordinary men cannot deal with this challenge,” he says, creating out of his internal conflict an affliction which, while denying his true self, does elevate his struggle to that of the heroic. The theme of power–the power over oneself and the power over others–ties gay and straight characters together. One by one characters proclaim “I decide” only to be forced, finally, to give way to a greater force that renders their claims of omnipotence and autonomy futile.

Disclosure: First Run Features and New American Vision provided a complimentary screener to 1More Film Blog for this review.

Reviews

Eyes Wide Open

Haim Tabakman

Previous Post

May 27, 2010

Robin Hood (Scott, 2010)

Next Post

June 9, 2010 CFP: Faith and Spirituality in Masters of World Cinema, Volume II

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category 10 Years Later 1999 Top 5 2007 Top 10 2008 Favorite Discoveries 2008 Top 10 2009 Favorite Discoveries 2009 Top 10 2010 Favorite Discoveries 2010 Top 10 2011 Top 10 2012 Top Ten 2013 Top Ten 2014 Top Ten Best Picture Winners Christian Spotlight on Entertainment Christianity Today Coming Soon Disclosure Disclosure--AS Disclosure--Book Disclosure--DVDS Disclosure--SEOL Disclosure--Travel Dissenting Opinion Elsewhere Emergenetics Essays Featured Film Fest DC--2014 Film Festivals Full Frame Documentary Film Festival 2010 Full Frame Documentary Film Festival 2011 Full Frame Documentary Film Festival 2012 Full Frame Documentary Film Festival 2013 Full Frame Documentary Film Festival 2014 Headline Interviews Laura on the Oscar Winners Podcasts Quick Impressions Reviews RiverRun Film Festival 2014 Television The Criterion Collection The Thin Place To Stream or Not to Stream? Top 10s and Other Lists Toronto International Film Festival 2009 Toronto International Film Festival 2010 Toronto International Film Festival 2011 Toronto International Film Festival 2012 Toronto International Film Festival 2013 Toronto International Film Festival 2014 Uncategorized Video Virginia Film Festival 2011 Virginia Film Festival 2013 Women's Film Festival 2012

Select a Month February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What Christian group commonly practices foot washing as a religious act?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Mennonites Presbyterians Methodists Episcopalians