Häxan

Häxan
directed by Benjamin Christensen




TW: for discussion of oppression, historical torture (inquisitions mostly), religious abuse, and coerced psychiatry.

How do we take a movie like Häxan? In some ways I feel like watching this is akin to watching DW Griffith's Birth of a Nation. On one hand, it's a piece of filmic history, on the other it's a reiteration of what were (and are) systemic injustices and violences done upon various marginalized bodies (women in the former and black people in the latter).

I'll grant that Häxan is probably not as purposefully inflammatory as Griffith's film. It takes its subject, the history of witchcraft and the treatment of women accused as witches throughout history, as a symptom of a bygone superstitious belief system supplanted by scientific insight and more modern medicine.... but that's.. well we'll get there.

The film begins with a recounting of various myths from throughout history, landing on how the conception of medieval Christianity conceived of the world as existing in spheres, at the top of which sat the Christian God and at the bottom of which was found Hell.




From here, we're informed of the belief that throughout history certain women were perceived as being particularly susceptible to the influence of the devil. It's interesting that the movie's portrayal of this history is very much of a double consciousness about this. On the one hand, these women are to be pitied and helped (oh the help...), but this is most often when they are in the company of men. When these women congregate together, they are feared. There are some really stunning shots during this part of the movie as the film shows the witches in flight across various nighttime foreground structures.



From this somewhat empowering view of the witch as an object of fear, the movie then moves us forward to a period where religious persecution holds sway. In this segment of the movie, we see that the movie does at least know that the treatment of women at this time was vile. Women are pressured into confessions under threat to their loved ones, and are routinely killed after enduring horrible torture at the hands of these monks and inquisitors. It's really at times some pretty brutal stuff, and there's a real sense of the injustice of the time.

After wrapping this up, the film begins its conclusion that's a bit... well, it's cause for reflection. The film was made in 1922, and I imagine was one of the very early documentary style films. The film has a very "look how far we've come" attitude about the attitudes toward women. Saying that what used to be called witchcraft.... is now properly known as hysteria....

The funny thing is, I think the film's a bit of a mirror. So many people still berate feminists with this idea that because women are now able to do X action (vote, work, have birth control), that we've somehow totally overcome sexist ideology. In this way, Häxan seems less like an opportunity to shake our heads at the ignorance and misogyny of these people in 1922, and more as an invitation to look at how this same sort of pattern of thought is ongoing and insidious, and that changes to ideology (such as the introduction of intersectionality to feminism) are needed as a fine-tuning instrument, lest we claim some action or movement as a panacea for oppression (as psychiatry is posited in this film).

Given this, I also think that the sympathetic portrayal of the witch is interesting. I have several female-identifying friends who associate strongly with various forms of witchcraft, paganism, and Wicca. I think that in some ways these are oftentimes counter-narratives that go against the patriarchal narratives instituted by Western Abrahamic religious hegemony. It's a subversive tactic, and the shot that I'm reminded of the most comes from the end of the witch segment of the movie. In it, it's explained that it was believed that witches would turn into cats and, with animal guards, sneak into churches and crap on the floor. I can't help but see this as another instance of the film discussing a sort of subversive tactic taken against oppression.



Also it has these hilarious costumes of the people dressed up as cats.... like, they could've just used real cats. But no, they made like, four or five of these costumes.

Nosferatu, eine Symphonie des Grauens

Nosferatu, eine Symphonie des Grauens 

directed by F.W. Murnau



Okay so it's not a criterion film, but it's part of another film list I'm working through, the 366 weird movies list found on 366weirdmovies.com. Also I wanted to watch a movie for Halloween that I hadn't seen yet, so I figured this would be a good opportunity for it.

So, going in, I knew that Nosferatu featured a rather marked variation from the standard Holywood vampire. Even Lugosi played a more attractive vampire than Schreck's Orlok, who I always thought looked kind of silly and uncomfortable in his costume. Other than that, though, I only knew of the films legal troubles with the Stoker estate.

Overall, I think Nosferatu is an interesting yarn that really dwells in its atmosphere very well. From the moment the film introduces Hutter's (this film's Jonathan Harker) boss Knock, there's this off-kilter feeling. I remember back in undergrad I watched The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari for a Horror-film class that I was in, and I was struck by the highly expressionistic set design of the film. Although Nosferatu came out two years after Caligari, it has a markedly different visual language to it. This isn't a bad thing, although... well I'll get to this later.

The shots that this country gives of the European countryside are just absolutely gorgeous! Unfortunately I couldn't really find any to post here, but there are many shots of mountains, rivers, and fields that just give this stunning view of what're supposed to be the Carpathians I believe.

Once Hutter meets Orlok, I will say that the film differs in a number of ways from Stoker's novel. Where Dracula was charming and polite, Orlok almost immediately tries to drink Hutter's blood. Also, notably, the brides are absent from this film. This isn't really a problem, but it does make Hutter's need to "escape" the castle once Orlok has left a little less clear.

The film differs drastically from the book at the end. The character of Ellen, Hutter's wife, who is sort of a combination of both Lucy Westenra and Mina Harker, seems to know that she needs to sacrifice herself so that Orlok will die in the sunlight. I did initially wonder if there wasn't any other way, but I kind of knew her death was coming toward about the midway point in the movie. I will say, I did notice as the movie went on though that Ellen is really the protagonist of the film. Hutter sets up the initial interaction between Orlok that prompts him to come to Germany, but from there all of the conflict revolves around Ellen and her figuring out how to set up Orlok's death. I'm somewhat uncomfortable with the whole "women dying in horror movies" stock thing, but I guess I'm a little bit more okay with it when it's more of a sacrifice to kill the film's monster. What're other folks thoughts on this?

A few other observations, most of which are minor nitpicky things
-There's a point in the film where an innkeep warns Hutter of a werewolf that prowls at night, and we get a shot of this werewolf and... it's so clearly a Striped Hyena. It's also adorable.
-Orlok at one point carries his coffin through the German town he's bought a house in and it's hilarious to watch. He's sort of awkwardly holding it under his arms and walking like he's trying to sneak around with it. Also, it's very obviously daylight in these shots, and I think we're just supposed to pretend it isn't. Maybe this is one of those things that would've been less apparent on older film.