In the two opening sequences of Ariel (1988) - director Aki Kaurismäki's typically straight-faced character study about a life and its cruel ironies - the main character, Taisto, watches as the mine where he once worked is closed and demolished, only to then observe with a calm detachment the suicide of his father in a coffee shop restroom. Both sequences are captured in Kaurismäki's typically deadpan approach that is rife with a cruel satire and an almost absurd sense of humour, whilst also setting up the spirit of defeat, failure and the unpredictable twists of fate that will conspire against the character throughout the rest of the film. From here we follow Taisto as he travels from Lapland to Helsinki in a Cadillac with no roof, and observe his completely disconnected and often bemused approach to life as he wanders the city, falls in love, goes to prison and ultimately, learns something about himself along the way.
For me, the film was somewhat reminiscent of Lindsay Anderson's O Lucky Man! (1973), with Kaurismäki presenting the film as an incongruous, picaresque fable that is rich in character, humour and an astute sense of pathos. Like Anderson's film, the plot is relatively simple in a cinematic sense - with the emphasis on a single character charting an unconventional path through life - but is adapted on a completely epic scale, with the sheer number of adventures and misadventures packed into such a tight running time destroying any broader notion of the "social realist" tag that many have applied to Kaurismäki's earlier works. Although I love his first three films, in particular Crime and Punishment (1983) and The Calimari Union (1985), for me, Kaurismäki really started to settle into his trademark style with Ariel, building on the greatness of the previous year's Hamlet Goes Business (1987) and setting the scene for later films such as Take Care of Your Scarf, Tatiana (1994), Juha (1999) and The Man Without a Past (2002).
Like many of Kaurismäki's best works, the reason Ariel works so well is as a result of the perfect casting. Every single performance in this film is great in its own unique little way, and really manages to convey a great deal about the characters and their roles within the film, without having to fall back on lengthy scenes of dialog and exposition. The structure and visualisation of the film is light as a feather, as Kaurismäki takes one shot of a character looking pensively from a window and carefully examining a half-empty packet of cigarettes and gives us a wealth of information, not only about where these characters are coming from, but also where they're heading. As with the other two films in the trilogy, and indeed, many of the director's other works, the film skilfully manages to walk that fine line between a cruel and mocking sense of humour- as we watch these characters strive and fail and ultimately fall flat on their faces in such a manner as to offer an obvious comedic punch - and a genuine sense of warmth and compassion.
If you're at all familiar with Kaurismäki's particular style of directing from films like Shadows in Paradise (1986) and The Match Factory Girl (1990), then you'll already have some idea of what to expect from the film in question; with those particular films acting as the bookends (with Ariel in between) to an informal trilogy of works looking at the downtrodden underclass constantly striving for hope and happiness in a cold and confusing world. Out of the three films in this loose triptych of modern-day fables, Ariel is for me the most moving and entertaining, and is also the one in which Kaurismäki themes and motifs are best served by the character and the situations he finds himself in. The direction is truly great; typical of Kaurismäki's minimal approach, with self-consciously flat and iconic compositions and an incredibly warm approach to lighting, while the script and the characters are strong enough to draw us in and make the experience all the more rewarding.
For me, the film was somewhat reminiscent of Lindsay Anderson's O Lucky Man! (1973), with Kaurismäki presenting the film as an incongruous, picaresque fable that is rich in character, humour and an astute sense of pathos. Like Anderson's film, the plot is relatively simple in a cinematic sense - with the emphasis on a single character charting an unconventional path through life - but is adapted on a completely epic scale, with the sheer number of adventures and misadventures packed into such a tight running time destroying any broader notion of the "social realist" tag that many have applied to Kaurismäki's earlier works. Although I love his first three films, in particular Crime and Punishment (1983) and The Calimari Union (1985), for me, Kaurismäki really started to settle into his trademark style with Ariel, building on the greatness of the previous year's Hamlet Goes Business (1987) and setting the scene for later films such as Take Care of Your Scarf, Tatiana (1994), Juha (1999) and The Man Without a Past (2002).
Like many of Kaurismäki's best works, the reason Ariel works so well is as a result of the perfect casting. Every single performance in this film is great in its own unique little way, and really manages to convey a great deal about the characters and their roles within the film, without having to fall back on lengthy scenes of dialog and exposition. The structure and visualisation of the film is light as a feather, as Kaurismäki takes one shot of a character looking pensively from a window and carefully examining a half-empty packet of cigarettes and gives us a wealth of information, not only about where these characters are coming from, but also where they're heading. As with the other two films in the trilogy, and indeed, many of the director's other works, the film skilfully manages to walk that fine line between a cruel and mocking sense of humour- as we watch these characters strive and fail and ultimately fall flat on their faces in such a manner as to offer an obvious comedic punch - and a genuine sense of warmth and compassion.
If you're at all familiar with Kaurismäki's particular style of directing from films like Shadows in Paradise (1986) and The Match Factory Girl (1990), then you'll already have some idea of what to expect from the film in question; with those particular films acting as the bookends (with Ariel in between) to an informal trilogy of works looking at the downtrodden underclass constantly striving for hope and happiness in a cold and confusing world. Out of the three films in this loose triptych of modern-day fables, Ariel is for me the most moving and entertaining, and is also the one in which Kaurismäki themes and motifs are best served by the character and the situations he finds himself in. The direction is truly great; typical of Kaurismäki's minimal approach, with self-consciously flat and iconic compositions and an incredibly warm approach to lighting, while the script and the characters are strong enough to draw us in and make the experience all the more rewarding.