Contrary to what happens in La Vie de Bohéme, in Ariel there is not much to amuse the viewer. The characters are dramatic (one of them even commits suicide, almost on stage) and the plot is almost tragic. However, as is characteristic of Kaurismäki's work, the drama is so gratuitous and silent that it is pathetic, taking on an aesthetic and philosophical character that informs almost all of the director's work.
Ariel, for its almost epic plot, for its fluidity, for the decadent beauty of the scenarios, even for the triumph of optimism after the protagonist's long crossing of the desert, deserves to be highlighted in the whole of the Finnish director's work, although it can equally be argued that , in essence, is a typical work of the same.
Undoubtedly, but even among the typical works there are those that are anthological. And this, for me, is one of the most balanced and attractive in Kaurismäki's career.
Ariel, for its almost epic plot, for its fluidity, for the decadent beauty of the scenarios, even for the triumph of optimism after the protagonist's long crossing of the desert, deserves to be highlighted in the whole of the Finnish director's work, although it can equally be argued that , in essence, is a typical work of the same.
Undoubtedly, but even among the typical works there are those that are anthological. And this, for me, is one of the most balanced and attractive in Kaurismäki's career.