Babel (I) (2006) User Reviews

A coherent, impressive, well-made, insightful piece of work

[Nazi_Fighter_David · 8/10 · 25 August 2007]

"Babel" centers on several groups of people in 4 countries that are all connected by one freak accident… Alejandro González Iñárritu takes us from North Africa to North America to Asia… His film exposes four unconnected story lines that are eventually divulged to be inextricably linked to one another…

The first involves an isolated family of goat herders who live in the High Plateaus of the Moroccan desert where two young boys are testing a rifle's range handed by their father to protect their goats from jackals...

The second concerns a Middle-class American couple on a bus tour of Morocco trying to save together their damaged marriage…

Meanwhile, in the US, there is grave danger for an undocumented immigrant—a Mexican nanny as she tries to return to United States after she wrongfully decides to take her two blonde-haired young charges to her son's wedding across the Mexican border, despite her employers' sudden change of plans, that needs that she remains with them and miss the joyful occasion…

And on the opposite side of the world, we follow, in Tokyo, an alienated, confused deaf and mute teenage student, recovering from her mother's suicide, who eases her feelings of depression and loneliness by trying to win the friendship or attention of every man or adolescent who crosses her path… She flirts with sexual exhibitionism to attract the attention of her distant and uncommunicative father…

"Babel" tries to make a point and the point is that when people can't or won't communicate, unpredictable paths can lead to tragic consequences… It also tries to leave a message of how a 'shooting' from a simple 'gift' can set off a chain reaction of tragic events in three continents and four countries over which the different characters have exceedingly uncomfortable human emotion…

Out of the entire cast, it is only Rinko Kikuchi as Chieko who steals the movie especially when she transmits to her friends her mad decision of sexual aggressiveness, saying to all: "Now they're going to meet the real hairy monster." This scene remembered me, in some way, Sharon Stone uncrossing legs in "Basic Instinct."

Listen.

[dead47548 · 8/10 · 8 January 2008]

Alejandro González Iñárritu's two previous films, Amores Perros and 21 Grams, dealt with the subject of very different people being connected on a small scale. Babel takes a different approach, but has the same central theme. The plot follows four different stories that stretch the entire globe (Morocco, Japan, Mexico and a few minutes in America) and shows how one single bullet can effect the lives of people so far apart. Guillermo Arriaga's script is breathtaking and perfectly structures this vast array of characters. Within minutes of being with them, we know exactly who they are and what drives their current personality. This gives time for the epic story to play out.

It's all centered around two young boys who are fooling around with a rifle and accidentally shoot American tourist Susan (Cate Blanchett) who is on "vacation" with her husband Richard (Brad Pitt). Though never directly saying it, it's quite clear that one of their son's died and Richard panicked and left his family behind; leaving Susan to care for their two remaining children. He came back and their vacation to Morocco was really just an excuse for them to get away and try to get their marriage back together. Ultimately it does bring them back to each other, but it takes tragedy to do so. Brad Pitt's performance is one of the finest of 2006 and his internal pain and emotional strength manage to bring a river of tears flowing from my eyes. It's his best performance since Twelve Monkeys and further proves that through all of the controversy of his social life, he's still a phenomenal actor. Back in America, their nanny Amelia (Adriana Barraza) is taking care of their two children while they are gone. Through unfortunate circumstances she has to bring them to Mexico for her son's wedding and things take a huge turn for the worse when they try to cross back over into America.The final story is a much further departure from the rest of the characters. It centers around a deaf-mute Japanese schoolgirl named Chieko (Rinko Kikuchi) who struggles with the pain of being so different from everyone else along with her mother's apparent suicide and the police's attempt at questioning her father about a gun he gave to a Moroccan man (the gun used to shoot Susan).

While most people believe that the film is about how people living so close to each other can be so different, I actually feel that it's the exact opposite. I think it's a story of how people so far apart (on different continents, speaking different languages) are almost exactly alike. All of the stories center around similar themes; loneliness, alienation, depression, the loss of a loved one and more while Arriaga never forgets to subtly mention the political outrage that comes from an American woman being shot in a foreign country. Every character feels the same emotions, deals with similar pain and are all connected by this single shooting. Babel starts off as a film about very different people in very different worlds, but ends up being one studying human nature and showing that even when we're worlds apart people we can still be so similar. All you have to do is listen.

An Exhausting Film

[evanston_dad · 6/10 · 19 October 2006]

Alas, it appears that, based on other user comments here at IMDb, I am in the minority on this film. I found it to be tedious and exhausting, and the effort I put into sticking with it far outweighed any sense of closure I received from it.

Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu appeared at the screening I saw and introduced his film as the final entry in a trilogy that includes "Amores Perros" and "21 Grams." Inarritu, in a comment that surprised me, said that his intent with this trilogy was not to focus on politics or social commentary, but rather to look at the modern family and what it means to be a father, son, mother, daughter, etc. This may have been his intention, but I don't feel that over the course of three entire films Inarritu did say much about these issues. Instead, he has painted a portrait of the world as he apparently sees it as a pretty bleak, uncaring and unforgiving place to live. I thought "Amore Perros" was so pessimistic as to border on nihilism; "21 Grams" came closer to finding a sense of peace and redemption among the general human crappiness. "Babel" sticks closer to the sentiments of the first film than the latter.

"Babel" is of course about communication, or more exactly miscommunication, in the modern world. It's a theme that has engaged the interest of many a filmmaker lately -- the idea that technology has made instant communication so much easier, yet people seem to be more than ever incapable of understanding one another. It's a conceit that greatly interests me, but Inarritu doesn't exploit its potential here. "Babel" consists of a monotonous series of scenes in which people shout, storm, fight and talk over one another, always in a hurry to be understood without taking the time to understand. Very well, point taken. But Inarritu makes this point within the film's first half hour -- you only need see one or two scenes of this kind of frustrating verbal gridlock to understand what he's trying to say; after that, the frustration just mounts without any kind of pay off. People are mean to one another, some are unbelievably callous (I didn't buy for a second that the group of tourists who accompany Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchett's characters to a remote Moroccan village after Blanchett is accidentally shot would be so uncaring as Inarritu depicts them). In Inarritu's world, all authority figures are to be justifiably feared, as they go around beating everybody up and pulling guns on innocent people. There's no nuance here; Inarritu pounds his message into you. For example, he obviously feels strongly about the mistreatment of illegal immigrants, especially those from Mexico, but instead of engaging in an intelligent debate about the topic, he sets up such an implausible, not to mention one-sided, scenario in this film that you can't help but agree with him.

The biggest disappointment in "Babel" is his failure to fully utilize a couple of wonderful actors he has assembled. Cate Blanchett is utterly wasted as the caustic American wife whose shooting sets off the chain of events. And Gael Garcia Bernal likewise gets nothing to do as a hot-headed Mexican whose attempts to run from border patrol creates a sad ending for one of the major characters. Brad Pitt does better than expected with the frenzied, frustrated husband of Blanchett. But these people have no history. We know virtually nothing about anybody in the film, yet are expected to care deeply about what happens to them. Maybe that's part of Inarritu's point -- that we're all connected to one another even if we don't know it, and that the world has become so small that there are no longer such things as strangers in it. But this is a film narrative, not real life, and you can't build a compelling one out of anonymous characters.

After "21 Grams" I thought I was warming up to Inarritu, but this film has sent me back to the detractors' camp. He certainly knows how to put a movie together, and he finds engaging ways to tell his stories. But his attitudes and approach to the modern world are so depressing and fatalistic that his films push me away rather than draw me in.

Grade: C+

A Powerful Conclusion to Iñárritu's Trilogy

[Doc-134 · 9/10 · 11 March 2007]

"Babel" represents director Alejanrdo Gonzalez Iñárritu's conclusion to a trilogy that begins with "Amores Perros" and continues with "21 Grams". That being said, if you have seen either of those films and did not like them, it is probably fair to assume that you will not like "Babel" either. Thematically and stylistically, this film continues in the same direction, but increases in scope, illustrating that one incident can trigger a devastating series of events all around the globe.

Like "21 Grams", "Babel" is constructed as a puzzle, with different pieces transpiring during different times and in different places. Many viewers will no doubt see similarities to Paul Haggis' "Crash" which explores similar issues; however Iñárritu's piece places more emphasis on human emotion and requires the viewer to be much more participative in the interpretation of themes and ideas.

The film is set into motion when the young sons of a Moroccan goat herder get careless with a new rifle and accidentally shoot an American tourist (Cate Blanchett) traveling with her husband (Brad Pitt). This one act sets off a series of tragedies with global implications. American officials interpret this as an act of terrorism and of course the media reflects this accordingly. There is a story of the couple's undocumented nanny who juggles taking care of their kids while attending her own son's wedding in Mexico. In my favorite story, a deaf Japanese girl (Rinko Kikuchi) struggles with her mother's recent suicide and a father who is emotionally distant. This story doesn't reveal its connection to the others until late in the film, but it is undoubtedly the most poignant.

At its core, "Babel" is about the difficulty of human communication and even though stories unfold in four different countries and in five languages (English, Arabic, Spanish, Japanese, and Sign); language is far from the principal obstacle. This film is more concerned with cultural assumptions and biases that tend to obscure reality and how our perceived differences keep us from connecting to each other. There are many reasons to recommend "Babel", but most of all because of its astounding ability to cope with issues of global importance while also presenting characters whose individual struggles are no less compelling.

Thoughtful, edgy, engaging and ambiguous

[mstomaso · 9/10 · 25 November 2006]

Babel is one of the most intelligent and artfully made films of 2006. The film has two central themes - culture and communication. It also exposes the connections between these themes in the arenas of politics, religion and geography sensitively and intelligently. The tag-line, though intentionally obtuse, sums the film up well - "If you want to be understood... Listen" - The parable is designed to speak to people all over the world who seem to believe that the meaning and importance of political boundaries somehow supersedes the value of humanity. It has especially important messages for Americans, however. And its release was well-timed to coincide with an election (2006) which may, in the long term, provide some hope for American foreign policy.

The film brilliantly weaves four deeply interconnected stories engaging five cultures on three continents. The cultures are North American, Mexican, Moroccan, Japanese and Japanese/deaf. At the heart of each tragedy is an inability to communicate. The tragedies begin with bad decisions that spin each plot somewhat out of control once cultural interference and miscommunication kick in.

Brad Pitt and Kate Blanchett play a troubled American couple having very little fun on a vacation in the Middle East. Susan (Blanchett) is shot by a young boy practicing with a gun (The two Middle Eastern boys who play the brothers in this film give Oscar-worthy performances, unfortunately I can't get their names out of IMDb easily). Three crises are simultaneously set off, as the Americans' nanny must find a way to attend her son's wedding in Mexico while Susan's medical crisis unfolds, and the poor Islamic family responsible for the gun begin to undergo a devastating crisis of their own. Of course the United States executive branch (not the government - sorry, we are still a democratically organized republic regardless of who sits in the oval office) interprets the crisis as an act of terrorism and a political crisis threatens to doom Susan to bleeding to death in a small remote town in the desert. Finally, in a seemingly disconnected story, Chieko (Rinko Kikuchi), a young, deaf, Japanese volleyball player is coming of age. Her mother has committed suicide and she seems bound to work out her problems with her father by devoting herself to a lascivious lifestyle.

The performances are, all around, excellent. The directing is exquisite - perfectly paced and visualized. This is a great film which, despite its commercial pedigree and big budget, achieves a rare level of artistry - proving that blockbusters do not have to be sold short. Babel will make you think, and think well. Make sure you bring your attention span and brain, however.

Very highly recommended.

A filmed that angered me and made me think on many different levels.

[mark.waltz · 7/10 · 8 April 2010]

I can't say that I liked this film because there are many things in it which either upset me or I didn't feel belonged in the film. It is a film which touches many different emotions because of the variety of narratives and themes that the plot deals with. On one hand, it is a film that shows how you sometimes find humanity in the most unexpected of places. On another hand, it shows that sometimes people fall into the depths of despair so drastically that it becomes practically impossible to dig yourself out. It is also about how the most spontaneous choices we make can destroy us and those around us, and how sometimes even the best of intentions can be the worst decisions we ever make.

The narrative involves telling several stories from different times and angles. For example, the story of the Moroccan boys with a new rifle is developed to where something bad happens, but the audience is not lead to see what that event is until later when another part of the story leads us to another view of the same incident. Then, the story of the deaf and mute Japanese girl dealing with her handicap is told, and it seems like this plot has no place in the movie. Another story develops with the loving Mexican nanny whose decision to take her wards with her to Mexico for a family wedding ends up destroying her life, even though she did so with the best of intentions. Whatever reason the title "Babel" is used, for me, it was meant as a metaphor for the Tower of Babel where a communication barrier creates conflicts that unfortunately cannot be resolved. The American couple (Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchette) traveling in Morocco must face the differences between their culture and the Muslims, while the two young American children find themselves suddenly trust into the Mexican culture that is somewhat strange, briefly scary (the killing of a chicken), and then fun (the wedding reception). This storyline for me is the most interesting, because it really could have been a separate movie that lead to human rights being fought for because of what happens to the poor Mexican lady who deserved better treatment than she got once her plans to return the children home went haywire. Adriana Barraza gives an amazing performance as the nanny; I thought she was award worthy and was thrilled to find out she got an Oscar Nomination. Not since Louise Beavers and Juanita Moore in both versions of "Imitation of Life" has there been such a well developed characterization of the tragedies and struggles of a servant whose devotion to their employers (in this case, Amelia's charges) is so filled with angelic beauty. This character truly is an Angel in America, suffering for being more loving than anybody can imagine.

I had a difficult time with the story of the deaf Japanese girl (Rinko Kikuchi). Yes, I can certainly feel for her loneliness but her seeming obsession with sexual attention was painful to watch, even if it was a pitiful cry for love at any degree. The scene in the dentist's office was particularly sickening to see, even if it shows an accurate account of the depths of despair that this character was going through. Kikuchi is excellent in the role, and it is probably the almost unbearable viewing of her pathetic life that made this role quite challenging and extremely difficult to play. Again, this is another plot which could have been a separate movie, watching this character get the psychological help she needed to move on to accept her deafness and accept herself for who she was. I found it entirely too creepy to watch.

There is also a brief sequence that I thought was unnecessary and made me very uncomfortable, watching the young Moroccan boy watching his older sister voluntarily strip naked for him, then him try to relieve himself afterwords. Was this really important to the plot? Not at all, and it sickened me to see this included. Develop these boys story with having the gun and the tragedy it resulted in, but keep the sexual contact out of it. It doesn't belong here.

There is the humanity level of the story which finds different nationalities coming together as one. We are reminded here we are not of different race. We are part of the human race, one which I would like to write every time some application asks me to specify. The scenes of the Arabs being more sympathetic to Brad Pitt's plight than the American tourists on the bus was very revealing. Also, how this blew up in the press as well. When a private painful event such as this happens, where should the press draw back? It becomes disgusting every time I see a private citizen's life in the news being invaded when they deserve respect was confirmed in the scenes with Pitt and the press here. This is a film I will have to think a lot about to really confirm how much I like it on the whole.

That damned tower of ours

[alanbittencourtx · 10/10 · 16 June 2007]

I admire Gonzalez Inarritu's balls and his talent of course. He opens himself up for a barrage of criticism and ridicule but at the end his genius wins. I saw the film months ago and I still think about it. I haven't seen it again because the recollection is so powerful and I don't want to mess it up by seeing it again intentionally. The Mexican woman with the white kids in the desert has become part of my nightmares. What an enormous thing for a movie to accomplish. I'm giving it a 10 and not because I "like" the film so much but because I saw myself coming to the conclusion that the film is a masterpiece all on my own. It inspires respect. Christ! I can't believe I'm saying that but I am and I'm meaning every word. In a way it reminds me of Bunuel's "Viridiana" a film that I hated so much it has become one of the most important films of my life. Go figure. To be disturbed. I mean deeply disturbed is a strange experience and I suspect that it has to do with being confronted by the truth.

Babel-on, Wayward Director...

[WriterDave · 6/10 · 6 November 2006]

With "Babel" Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu has crafted the apex to his trilogy that began with the gangbusters "Amores Perros," and continued with the finely crafted and haunting "21 Grams." Unfortunately, it seems that peak is crumbling. "Babel" has the same intertwining story structure as the previous two, but in hopping across continents and making the stories global (taking place in Mexico, Morrocco, and Japan), he loses some much needed focus. It also has what has now become his signature editing-with-a-hacksaw-style of chronology that worked beautifully in "21 Grams" but seems forced here. In fact there's one set of scenes taking place at a Mexican wedding that is needlessly incoherent in its jumping back and forth. Everything in this set of scenes is taking place at one location on one night, so why the jumbled chronology? It makes one wonder if they forgot an editor all together.

"Babel" is not without its merits. The story lines are more often than not thought-provoking and challenging. The ensemble acting is top notch from the big stars (Cate Blanchett is riveting as always in all her subtle and alluring ways and makes the most of her limited screen time) down to the no-name locals (the Morrocan kids being especially effective). There's also a commendable ambition to the whole endeavor as it attempts to explore communication and human emotion in the increasingly global and paradoxically intolerant world. Memorable, too, is some great cinematography of the Tokoyo skyline (especially that awesome closing pan-out from the high-rise balcony) and the Morrocan highlands, where the centerpiece of the intertwined tragedies takes place when an American tourist is accidentally shot by some goat-herding kids playing with a gun used to keep away jackals from their family's livelihood.

Unfortunately "Babel," in its uncompromising vision, plays out painfully in strained, awkward lurches that stretch believability. It's interesting how during various moments, different story lines seem the most compelling. The early scenes in Morocco of both the American couple (Blanchett and Brad Pitt) and the local goat-herders are stark and intimate and represent the best at what Inarritu is capable of as a storyteller. Later, he applies a humanistic touch to the scenes of the Mexican nanny taking her American charges across the border for her son's wedding. There's a wide-eyed innocent nature to the culture clash he depicts that gets garbled later when Gael Garcia Bernal (as the nanny's nephew) dives off the deep end with little reason and leads to a tragic series of events that really test the viewer's ability to take this all as seriously as the filmmaker's would like us to. Likewise, the Japanese tale of the deaf-mute teenage girl struggling to cope with society's unwillingness to communicate on her level, a distant father, and the recent suicide of her mother lurches forward so melodramatically it becomes banal, and the connection it has to the other stories is the biggest stretch to swallow, and most viewers will choke on it.

Then, of course, there is the presence of the aforementioned uber-star Brad Pitt. He's at a point in his career where his celebrity status trumps his acting talent. He's actually quite good as Blanchett's frantic husband, but his star-power is distracting and constantly has the viewer thinking in the back of their mind "wow, Brad Pitt can act" rather than feeling anything for the character. This is a piece of stunt-casting that doesn't work.

There are many compelling moments and noteworthy performances in "Babel," but it crumbles under its own weight as just about everything is reduced to the big breakdown/crying scene, and we are left wondering what Inarritu will do next as a director. He's got talent to spare, but ran out of steam when taking his intimate look at human tragedy global with "Babel."

Poetry

[mysticwit · 9/10 · 12 October 2006]

Alejandro González Iñárritu's direction is brilliantly layered and intricately woven. He deftly uses different film stock, imagery, sound, and stories to weave a single tale out of four disparate ones, a talent he's shown in other films.

The story by screenwriter Guillermo Arriaga and Iñárritu has one incident ricochet around the globe, and peeling back the layers of culture to show the frustrating inability to communicate, and the poignancy and universality of familial love.

Each story is complete, but a series of snapshots that leave as many questions as answers. As the stories unfold, the backstories and the futures of the characters are chock full of possibility and pain. As one commenter during the Q&A said, it was frustratingly beautiful. Each storyline deals with family and conflict from the inability to communicate or to understand.

All the performances are incredible, and very touching. Brad Pitt did an excellent job, and the always outstanding Cate Blanchett, a powerhouse actor if there ever was one, has the least screen time of any of the leads. Few can do so much with so little. But the really outstanding performance is Rinko Kikuchi as a deaf-mute Tokyo teen.

To say any more would possibly lesson the experience, so let me just say this: it may seem confusing at times, but by the end, it will seem like poetry.

Dangerous Elisions

[tedg · 21 May 2007]

There's something unique to film, something relatively new in the word that has had profound effect on how we relate to art.

I call it noir, and define it a bit differently than the ordinary fellow, who thinks it has something to do with dark shadows and unhappy endings.

For me, noir is centered on the idea that the camera represents our eyes; that the nature of the world we see is bent by us watching it; and that the fate of the characters in that world are arranged — sometimes by extreme coincidence — for our purposes. The extreme photography is an indicator of that eye, and not necessarily a characteristic of noir. The camera might not be cinematically introduced, though of course it usually is.

I'm interested in the evolution of noir because its right at the edge of how we construct narrative, how we experiment with ideas and the stories we swim in. But what does a filmmaker do if that edge is always moving? Nearly every film I see that was made recently has some twist on the exploration — this is how genres mature today, and how we build tools to see ourselves.

For some reason, its the Spanish-speaking filmmakers that are doing the most interesting work in pushing this further, and effectively.

What Iñárritu does is especially adventurous. I particularly appreciate it because instead of rattling around in established cinematic conventions, he's trying to extend to new ones. Well, not precisely new, but newly recast. I like his idea of narrative braiding, but that's only part of his adventure on the edge. Its what he leaves out that matters. The absences aren't noticed because of the way things are sliced and respliced. And people think the story is important, which of course it isn't, just a pointer: here generally misinterpreted as miscommunication. Deliberately so, I think.

Those elided parts mean that we fill in more of the story than usual, that the container of a long form film can be bigger than usual. That it presents an open world. What's new for Iñárritu is the notion of referring to large sweeps of society as metaphors; and also new is the idea of lacing watchers in the story, here a disembodied global TeeVee audience. They "watch" but of course see almost nothing of what we see.

Its about listening transformed into watching; each of the three threads involves watching. The Japanese episode of course literally has watching as listening and the lasting trauma of what has been seen. The Morrocan episode is triggered by a boy spying on his nude, colluding sister, and on the Brad Pitt side about a reluctant busload of watchers. The Mexican story has a woman going to see her son's wedding and having trouble with being seen clumsily.

Sight. Made explicit of course by the cinematic flourishes, the deliberate differences in the three camera stances, whose differences penetrate to primitives beyond grain, light, stance to the soul of the eye. Its as if Iñárritu decided to create three of the most elementary braids of sight he possibly could with the notion that their cleanliness would allow them to braid into a larger container than any other film.

Its one of the most exciting things happening. Almost thankfully he underused Cate, who is one of the few actresses who could hint that everything other than her we see is in her mind. Almost thankfully he underplays the merger into one soul of three wonderful actresses.

Almost, but not quite thankfully, he only hints at the notion of detective work, three types of discovery.

Its delicate, good, rich, dangerous without seeming so.

Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.

Most overrated film of 2006

[MovieMan1975 · 6/10 · 15 January 2007]

Should have been called Babble.

Cuz that's all Innaritu did, just babble some pointless stories. I'm a fan of his work, and loved 21 Grams, but this has to be one of the most disappointing pieces in a long time. 2 1/2 hours of my life I want back. This is supposed to be a film about communication. It really isn't. The Brad Pitt/Cate Blanchet storyline delves nowhere into themes of communication. They are even able to freely communicate with the villagers where they are stranded. The deaf-mute Japanese girl storyline is way too obvious. And kinda kinky. But in the end, in a really sad angsty emo kinda way. Made me throw up in my mouth a little. The Morroccan family with the rifle storyline? it kinda went nowhere fast, and forces you to watch a pre-pubescent boy masturbate to thoughts of his little sister naked. It added absolutely nothing to the film. Maybe an homage to Bertolucci? lmao The Mexican nanny storyline definitely had the best acting. And the most tension. However, the plot is ludicrous, and what is an attempt of commentary on the illegal alien situation in America falls flat, due irrational behaviour on part of the characters. Their decisions are their dooms. There is no miscommunication here. Thus no theme of communication. And if, as Innaritu claims, this is a film about communication, then wtf? We have no film. We have Brad Pitt propping us some lame melodrama with vacuous star power. Worst Film of 2006.

GO SEE CUARON'S: CHILDREN OF MEN, INSTEAD

A Bit Of Teaching, A Lot Of Preaching, Oodles of Talent

[mjstellman · 9/10 · 2 March 2007]

I loved "Amores Perros" It was revolutionary in so many ways and smelled like the real thing even if I couldn't quite put my finger as to what the real thing really was. "21 Grams" had gigantic intentions and superb performances but didn't feel quite revolutionary because we had kind of seen it before - and better - in "Amores Perros". Now "Babel" and, my goodness, the first thing that comes to mind is, what an extraordinary filmmaker Inarritu really is. I suspect that his universe, even if it feels infinite, it is framed - beautifully so - between the walls of biblical references. His methods may be way ahead of the times but the roots are as ancestral as fire itself. I'm not sure where I want to go with all this but the question is, Inarritu is taking me places and that's what I long for in a filmmaker. He's not taking any of us for granted and I'm very grateful for that. His movies are experiences and I for one can't wait for the next one.

Pretentious and doesn't rise to the hype

[kalina-5 · 6/10 · 10 January 2007]

There are movies that appear in the right time and place with some good actors and hype director and are usually concerned with some broad humane concept. Given enough critical acclaims these movies start to be overexposed and finally everyone starts believing there is more to them than just the latest stylish interpretation of a familiar subject. Well, Babel is that kind of movie - stylishly shot in interesting locations and with some great performances it deals with the the theme of miscommunication. It doesn't say anything new or anything interesting for that matter but it says it pretentiously and with some visually astounding techniques. After sitting through over 2 hours you will walk away with grief in your heart and feeling so emotionally disconnected with all the characters that the message of the movie will probably be lost. This doesn't mean that the actors didn't do their best to convey the grief, sadness and loneliness they were experiencing. It's just that the movie feels contrived at times and the story (actually stories) is too bleak and even boring at times to be memorable. All in all, Babel is not a great movie although it has the elements of one but they just don't come together.

Another Tedious Jumble

[elkindk · 3/10 · 15 September 2009]

Having recently watched Babel I would classify this movie as part of another in a long series of alienated laments modern directors are making about this so-called, "Post 9-11 world." I found it so boring, frustrating, and gratingly tedious that I eventually turned it off and only barely made it through on the second try.

Inarritu (forgive the incorrect punctuation, please) has chalked himself up as another director interested in the "everyday" trials and tribulations of modern-day human beings all around the world, creating a world in which untoward tragedies strike normal people and exploring the consequences of these people's reactions. In the end we are meant to believe that this movie and others like it ("Crash" comes to mind) offer an uplifting thought that, though things are complex and often terrible in our globalist reality, we are all latently connected and in this mess together. The problem with "Babel," (and "Crash" comes to mind here, too) is that the director at no point offers any relatable characters, settings or situations to allow the viewer to connect to the things happening on the screen. With Babel, I felt like a viewer in an aquarium, watching terrible things happen to people who I absolutely could not care less about. Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchett's characters are tragic on paper, with a disintegrating marriage thrown into relief by terrible circumstance. But they are both so one-dimensional as to make us completely unable to empathize with their troubles. There isn't a glimmer of personality between them, and no affection either, which makes us hate Cate Blanchett more than we long for the redemption of her marriage. And the Morroccan citizens they interact with neither bring something out of the American characters nor show something of their own dignity themselves, making the two tourists' predicament utterly sterile.

The other character's share a similar plight, leading personality-less lives that, in the end, cast their stories into cliché. And this is the ultimate point: without convincing or particular character, any scenario is a cliché, a fable, making Babel a collection of fables with a "message" so hollow and uninteresting I'd expect it in a junior-high English paper before a feature film.

As a result this movie strikes me as a very dull and frankly sophomoric lament about modern alienation. It has nothing new, convincing, or specific to say. Combine this with repetitive and sometimes even action-less unfolding of the plot which hammers the movie's purpose into your head, and we have a movie experience with no gratification.

All-in-all, I'd like my money back.

See also, "Crash."

Excellent, bloody; well-communicated film

[dfranzen70 · 9/10 · 21 February 2007]

Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu's Babel weaves four disparate and seemingly unrelated tales into a distinct, gritty narrative about the importance of communication - and what can happen when it goes awry. The movie is oftentimes difficult to watch, with ultrarealistic cinematography and gutsy, honest performances from its entire cast, particularly Oscar-nominated actresses Adriana Barraza (Amelia) and Rinko Kikuchi (Chieko).

Told nonlinearly, the movie describes the travails of a troubled married couple with a tour group in Morocco, played by Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchett. Something in their past has driven them apart, and to help deal with the problem they have taken a trip together. Meanwhile, the sons of a shepherd fight over who's the better shot with their new rifle and fire a blast at the couple's tour bus, critically wounding Susan (Blanchett).

Richard (Pitt) calls home in San Diego to notify the nanny of their children, Amelia; Amelia is in a bit of a bind, because she expected the parents home so she could attend the wedding of her son in Mexico. With Richard and Susan not returning soon, and with no one else available to watch the children, she takes them with her to the wedding.

In Japan, a deaf-mute Japanese girl acts out in reaction to her mother's suicide, which she discovered; the virginal Chieko becomes a huge sexual flirt, even removing her panties in a crowded restaurant to flash older boys. Chieko craves human contact but feels that the world's even more shut off to her now than ever before, and she sullenly shuns even her father's attentions.

It should go without saying that this film really isn't for everyone. It's gut-wrenchingly tough to watch at times, especially when Susan's wound is being treated. You can readily imagine how it'd be if you, an unworldly American, were suddenly in dire need of expert medical attention in a part of the world that wasn't really famed for it. That's enough to strike terror in me already, and I haven't even mentioned how Richard and Susan are awaiting help to arrive in a small, impoverished village with no running water or electricity - and only one person who can speak English to them.

How exactly these stories are commingled becomes evident as the movie progresses, but it's not all elegantly laid out for the viewer to immediately grasp; this is accomplished in part by the nonlinear storytelling. We see a scene near the end of the movie that is a mirror image of one from the beginning, except told from a different character's perspective. That's a tribute to the wonderful camera-work and editing by, respectively, Rodrigo Prieto and the team of Douglas Crise and Stephen Mirrone.

Barraza turns in a powerful, heart-breaking performance; at one point, she's stranded in the middle of the Sonoran desert with her two young charges clad in her dress from the wedding. Dazed by the blistering heat, Amelia cannot gain her bearings in the blazing heat, and she despairs. Then she makes a critical decision with devastating consequences.

Kikuchi is absolutely mesmerizing as the silent Chieko. Without uttering one word, she's able to convey a vast array of emotions, from loneliness to hostility to love to lust to affection. She's alternately serene and violent, in charge of and captured by her impediment. Chieko resents her father, her volleyball teammates, and most of all every so-called normal person who looks at deaf-mutes as monsters, creatures to be scorned and taken advantage of. Like Barraza, Kikuchi's role called for a difficult sacrifice: plenty of nudity.

Babel is a spellbinding, multifaceted story with towering, passionate performances by all of the leads. It's full of moxie and stark realism, and despite some minor plot implausibilities, it's a true feather in the cap for Inarritu.

Excellent performances, superb direction, wonderful script!

[locationmanager · 10/10 · 25 May 2006]

Babel is my film of the year, and probably the best film I've seen in quite a few years. The film looks at relationships, from husband/wife, parent/children, brother/sister and plays around the themes of love in adversity. The characters are all interlinked in a very random way, it's a little like 10 degrees of separation. The film is set in Morocco, Mexico, Japan and the US, and the director makes full use of the different backdrops to bring the picture alive. The characters are deep and insightful, each has a problem to face up to and the subtle, naturalistic way their issues play out make for truly emotional cinema. This is not a film about heroes, it's a film about trying to make the right choices when your back is to the wall, and the doubts that go with this. Great movie, especially if you're a parent as your protective instincts will kick in at least once during this movie!

Smart and ambitious but frustrating to watch

[adamonIMDb · 6/10 · 2 April 2020]

I'm generally not a fan of non-linear storytelling in films - there is usually no reason for it and it can be frustrating and difficult to follow the plot. While the plot in 'Babel' is relatively easy to follow, the film still suffers the same annoying problems as other non-linear films.

The most irritating thing for me is how scenes that are connected and happening at the same time are presented so far apart. At the very start of the film we see kids fire a bullet at a coach, yet the scene that logically goes together with this from inside the coach does come until a significant while later.

The viewer also never gets to properly know any of the characters - there's no time for any character development as the film is constantly going back and forth between characters and situations. As a result, you don't really care for what happens to any of them.

The saving grace of 'Babel' is its ending, which brings everything together and wraps the story up nicely. Even though it can be a frustrating watch at times, 'Babel' is a smart and well-made film.

Four stories. Three countries. One powerful film.

[Flagrant-Baronessa · 8/10 · 3 November 2006]

If you – like me, and so many others – found 'Crash' (2005) offensively finger-wagging and dumb (its inherent message was: "Racism is bad."), Alejandro González Iñárritu's Babel will make it up to you with refreshing intelligence, respect for cultures and crisp acting. The plot outline is difficult to do justice in one sentence but much like Crash it explores culture clashes in life by navigating multiple interweaving story lines.

One of these is the story of the married couple Richard and Susan Jones, played by Pitt and Blanchett, who travel to Morocco 'to get away'. Theirs is a remarkably complex and bruised marriage at first but once the plot gradually unfolds the root of their problems becomes apparent. What is most remarkable about their storyline is that Brad Pitt actually emotes as an actor (although is he is grossly facilitated by heartfelt circumstances) and that Cate Blanchett regrettably never gets the chance to shine in her performance.

Cut to two young Arabic boys in the barren craggy hills of the outback of Morocco. They are brothers whom have just been given a rifle by their father to protect their goats and now they are having fun in learning how to fire the weapon. There is refreshing gritty honesty in the portrayal of this storyline – from the dirt and heat on their clothes to the realistic dialogue – and many heartrending moments due to the aforementioned. But be warned, this is no glossy or romantic depiction of North Africa...

Another storyline takes place in colourful Tokyo in Japan, detailing the teenage life of a deaf girl called Chieko. Hers is arguably the most compelling story especially in terms of sheer fun to be had. Being a teenage girl is hard enough and Chieko finds that her disability distances her from other people – the boys she is interested in looks at her like she is a monster – and frustrated and desperate to be loved, she indulges in teenage clichés like partying and drinking in the modern mess that is Tokyo. Here I found the single most vivid disco sequence completely sucking me in and not letting go until the fast-paced euphoria of Chieko finally subsided. There is absolute gold to be found in this Tokyo story.

Finally, the last storyline takes place in Mexico and the main character is a woman called Amelia (Adriana Barraza), who also happens to be Richard and Susan's nanny. When her son is getting married in Mexico and she cannot get a day off, she takes the kids with her across the border. Big mistake. I'm sure many will be able to identify with the sprawling surge of Mexican culture at the wedding and indeed the music and pace made this storyline both beautiful and enjoyable to follow. It is evident that director Alejandro González Iñárritu feels most at home in this setting and as a result, the story shines and its characters emote.

Although there is a lot to keep track of in 'Babel' owing to its many story lines, there is such a fluent and seamless intercutting of these segments that it is impossible not to be entranced in the entirety of the film. There is a wealth of juxtapositions of culture to be found and much fun and visual stimulation to be had because of it. From the dramatic barren landscapes of Morocco to the fast-paced teen world of Tokyo, Babel treats contrast with remarkable sensitivity and skill of the subject matter. In other words, it gives a nonsentimental yet compassionate insight into the lives of different people whose stories orbit around the kaleidoscope that is 'Babel', sewn together by unsparing and uninhibited performances.

Better yet, you get so caught up in each story that when it cuts to make room for the next you feel almost a little offended – and that is good film-making. Babel, given its content, is everything Crash was not. Finally, it offers a satisfying and humble conclusion to an otherwise epic film. Although I cannot help but remark, Iñárritu, come on – you could have made a good movie in less than 2½ hours... *hmph*

8 out of 10

fascinating

[Kirpianuscus · 19 March 2017]

a film. many stories. great actors. Babel has the gift to be more than a film. or giving a story. or proposing characters. it is a sort of manifesto. about the roots of every day reality. about the price of success, happiness, love, sacrifices, victories, sadness. and that did it a sort of poem. about its public more than about the evolution of characters. a film about mark of gestures. about decisions and believes and science to accept the truth. it is not easy to define it. because entire film is in the space of the frame of the last scenes. a film about ordinaries people. in a labyrinth. as parts of labyrinth. looking the second chance. or, more exactly, the essence of freedom against yourselves.

Alejandro González Iñárritu goes on the automatic pilot.

[Boba_Fett1138 · 6/10 · 10 May 2007]

This is what happens when you receive nothing but praise as a director; you get sloppy and think you can get away with just everything. Having loved his previous movie I must say that Alejandro González Iñárritu really overdid it this time. The different plot lines don't feel connected and the events in the movie just not interesting enough, since they seem to be without a point. In the end the movie makes nothing more than a totally pointless impression. The movie has no message, so is there any reason to still watch this movie?

Well, of course there is. There is nothing wrong with the actual directing style of Alejandro González Iñárritu in this movie but there is all the more wrong with the story. It's like they didn't even put enough effort in it and where thinking no matter what we are going to tell, this movie is going to be considered another brilliant one and will be in the race for many big awards, which it also was. It's like movie making completely on the automatic pilot.

Just like we are used from a Alejandro González Iñárritu, the movie is told with many different plots in different settings with people in it that are all somehow connected. Problem with this movie really is that all of the plot lines are connected in a too simplistic and thin way. The movie just doesn't always feel as one whole, which is probably also due to the settings of the movie; America/Mexico, Morroco and Japan. 3/4 totally different settings over the world with 2/3 totally different characters, atmosphere and style.

Quite frankly I don't understand why they picked Morocco as a setting for the movie. I think that this movie gives a wrong images of the country, as being a dangerous, terrorist filled country, where the police shoots without questions on children and beat up old persons, while in fact Morocco, compared to other African countries is far more advanced and also a far more stable country. Why didn't they picked any random middle-eastern country? It would had made the story far more believable and also more easy to buy for the viewers. And then there is the Japanese storyline. Well, well, well, what can I say...was it truly necessary? The way it's connected to the other story lines of the movie is incredibly thin and why does it have to focus on a sexual frustrated deaf Japanese teenager? Is it interesting? Is it engaging? Sorry, I really don't think so. The movie would had been probably been better off without it.

The movie did well at the Oscars and was favorite for the big wins to many. Eventually it only won one Oscar for the best original score, by Gustavo Santaolalla, for his guitar plucking. It sort of makes me mad and shows that there is something wrong with the way the Academy votes for best original score, that over the past decade or so, mostly simplistic subtle scores have won the Oscar, instead of orchestrated musical scores. Bernard Hermann, Michael Kamen Jerry Goldsmith, Elmer Bernstein, Basil Poledoouris all won one or none Oscar's in their life, Gustavo Santaolalla already has two...does this seem right and fair to you?

Like we are used to from Alejandro González Iñárritu, the movie is filled with some big stars. However none of them is really ever given the opportunity to shine and makes you wonder if this movie wouldn't had been just as good/bad with different unknown actors in it. This was the role Brad Pitt skipped a part in "The Departed" for? It really wasn't his smartest career move and I just love the way how they tried to make him look like Benicio Del Toro in this movie. Sarcasm alert! The chemistry between him and Cate Blanchett was also a bit off. The only performance I really liked in the movie were from Gael García Bernal and Kôji Yakusho. It just isn't a movie that tries to shine with its actors, it's a movie that tries to shine with its story and storytelling and the realism of it all. In this case it didn't really worked out.

The movie in the end feels like a pointless one, that with a couple of sequences, mainly with explicit sexual content in it, tries to provoke. I just couldn't care less about it all. Apparently the overall message of the movie was supposed to be that people in and from different countries don't communicate well enough. Well let me tell you, I'm a sort of a communication student and I certainly didn't picked up this message from this movie. So please try harder next time Mr. Alejandro González Iñárritu and Guillermo Arriaga.

Yes of course the movie is still better than the average one and of course there are more than enough elements present in this movie to make it worthwhile. I just hope that Alejandro González Iñárritu next project will be more original in its approach and will have a better and more connected script. I'm still a fan!

6/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

A Serious, Thought-Provoking, Uncompromised Film... from Hollywood?

[yndprod-2 · 9/10 · 27 September 2006]

BABEL is better than I'd expected it could be. I've heard the beginnings of the backlash ("it's another CRASH") coming on the heels of the Cannes Film Festival triumph... and I kind of bought it. I respected AMORES PERROS and 21 GRAMS but neither really connected with me... So I was totally unprepared to be as impressed by this film as I was.

I wasn't a fan of CRASH -- I thought it was an overly-simplified take on a complex issue and that the characters were drawn in cartoony, larger-than-life strokes. BABEL, for me, is the complete opposite: as dense and complicated as the current state of world relations (between countries, between strangers, between family members and friends), filled with complex characters who are never reduced to stereotype. The performances are uniformly excellent, from the non-actors to the unknowns (here in America, anyway) to Brad Pitt, Gael Garcia Bernal and Cate Blanchett (all of whom give completely unflashy, ensemble performances). And the technical film-making is astounding -- not just the direction, but on every front (the editing and the amazing score deserve particular attention).

The most remarkable thing for me is the way director Inarritu and screenwriter Arriaga capture the different rhythms of life in Morocco, America, Tokyo and Mexico. Rather than using some kind of clear-cut stylistic device (like the color-coding in TRAFFIC), they establish the distinct flow and feel of each country early on and maintain it throughout the film. It's that kind of depth that makes BABEL such a unique mainstream film.

My best advice is to go into this film with as few preconceptions as possible and enjoy an experience that's become increasingly rare since the heyday of the 1970s: an intelligent Hollywood film with something important on its mind.

Not Half As Meaningful As It Thinks It Is

[Rathko · 6/10 · 30 November 2006]

I wish I could tell you to just go read my review of 'Crash' but IMDb's 10-line rule prevents me from doing so. So here we go, then:

The stories are incredibly simplistic, with barely enough content to satisfy a 45 minute TV show – father gives his kids a gun, they accidentally shoot somebody and are arrested by the police; a woman is shot and her husband waits for help to arrive; housekeeper takes kids to wedding in Mexico and gets lost in desert crossing back over the border; Japanese teenager wanders around Tokyo without underwear. That's it. Whatever complexity 'Babel' possesses is the result of the random intercutting of these stories, not from the individual stories themselves. The fact is that you could take three random Janet and John 'plots' and cut them together to provide the illusion of post-modern deconstructed complexity. It's the cinema equivalent of the Emperor's new clothes, and for some reason, every critic in town is happy to marvel at the new duds.

Like 'Crash', 'Babel' is an actor's movie. It gives them an opportunity to cry and rage and play vulnerable and desperate, which all involved do very well. Brad Pitt gets to pull a Charlize Theron and play 'ugly' for Oscar consideration - graying hair, bags under the eyes, and crow's-feet. The lengths some actors will go to for their art! But the emotional hysteria, which Inarritu cranks up to outrageous proportions, is allowed to replace character development. Few characters actions seem rational, many are completely irrational, and you don't feel any connection to their plight beyond the fleeting sympathy for a sad looking face.

But it's this kind of sappy, over-emotional, manipulative storytelling that the Academy loves to get behind. Actors love it because it features the kind of roles they'd all kill for. Director's love it for its liberal, multinational, lets-all-hold-hands theorizing. Producers love it because it reinforces their belief that foreign accents, playing 'ugly' and crying a lot wins awards.

Inarritu has a lot of talent, but it seems wasted on a self-indulgent and vaguely teenage-Goth-activist obsession with the cruelty and injustice of the world. It's a far better film than the risible nonsense that was 'Crash', but it falls a long way short of the praise being heaped on it by many critics.

Expect it to win, however, several Oscars.

The Virtue Of Misunderstanding

[marcosaguado · 10/10 · 11 February 2007]

There is nothing coincidental about the human connection but if you're interested in finding a reason for it, for them - you would have to dig into your spirit. It was meant to be and it was meant to be in the way that it unfolds, no matter how absurd, how contradictory, how seemingly coincidental. I don't know anything about Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu, other than he is one of the most extraordinary filmmakers to emerge in the 00's, but I suspect he has the soul of a Christian prophet, the mysticism behind the realism of his stories reek of God and of New Testament. Amores Perros, 21 Grams (the weight of the soul, remember?) now Babel the famous, or infamous biblical tower. Gonzalesz Inarritu has put together an immediate universe populated by incomprehension and humanity shaken and wrapped in a bloody cloth of the purest linen. His images will remain with me forever in particular Adriana Barraza's moment with the American kids in the desert. A total triumph.

The intertwining storyline is getting a little old

[angie_m4 · 6/10 · 11 January 2007]

I understand that Babel rounds off the trilogy that Innaritu and his scriptwriter started with Amores Perros and 21 Grams. I must say that I'm a little relieved. After movies like Pulp Fiction, Adaptation and most recently, Crash, Babel might seem a little tiresome. After all, we've seen enough movies with this kind of narrative that following the plot is not much of a challenge anymore.

Those familiar with Innaritu's previous work, will know that the driving force of the narrative is the how the story switches between different groups of people who don't seem to be connected in any way, but are, and in Babel's case, some connections that are trifling. Richard and Susan - two American tourists on a visit to Morocco; Debbie and Mike - their children who are cared for by their Mexican nanny Amelia; Ahmed and Yussef - young Moroccan goatherds given a gun by their father to kill jackals who prey on their goats; Cheiko - a deaf-mute Japanese girl who is still dealing with her mother's recent suicide.

So, where do all these people fit in? Pay attention: While Richard and Susan travel in a tour bus in Morocco, Susan gets shot by a mysterious gunman. The sniper is in fact, Ahmed, who was testing the gun's range. Meanwhile, in Southern California, Amelia is trying to find someone who can look after Debbie and Mike while she hops across the border to attend her son's wedding. On the other side of the international date line in Tokyo, the gun is traced to Chieko's father, who gave it to Ahmed's father in thanks for guiding him through the Moroccan wilderness.

The running theme is that of miscommunication. That works wonderfully well in the two stories set in Morocco. The US government jumps the gun, branding Susan's shooting a terrorist act. The events that follow provide meat enough for a movie in itself, but the script requires that the story cuts back to two more tenuous connections that also would have been just fine as separate movies. In light of this, the movie has two stars, and they're not Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchett. They're Rinku Kikuchi (Cheiko) and Rodrigo Prieto (director of photography). Kikuchi proves that the year-long audition process for her role was worth it. She manages to convey the angst of a misunderstood teenager wrestling with several demons -- her mother's death, rejection from boys her age because of her disability, and the inability to connect with her father. Prieto beautifully captures the contrast between grimy, rocky Morocco and the almost sterile-looking Tokyo.

As for Brad Pitt's much talked about Oscar nomination for this movie, in my book, doing a George Clooney (growing a scruffy beard and showing a little gray) doesn't qualify as an award-winning performance.

From a 50+ perspective: Thumbs Down

[bmcdannell · 1/10 · 17 August 2008]

Babel won tons of awards and tremendous critical acclaim. This tells us that coherent plotting and sensible storytelling are no longer requirements for cinematic accolades. Let's briefly outline some of the irredeemably absurd elements of the story: Morroccan authorities, without benefit of weapon, interviews or any other physical evidence whatsoever are able to track down the previous two owners of a rifle as well as the current owner - a desert goatherder - and locate his family. While they are doing this, with SUVs crawling all over the desert, neither they nor anyone else is able to get an ambulance, a helicopter or even so much as a golf cart to the person who has been wounded. A goatherder hands a high-powered rifle over to his two pre-teen sons with neither instruction nor apparent concern about their safety or anyone else's. Those sons - who are possessed of enough maturity and responsibility to tend the family's herds, give no thought to the possible consequences of using a moving tour bus for target practice. An illegal alien who has cared for two children since birth (a) waits until the day of her son's wedding to make plans to attend, and (b) decides to cross the border back into the U.S. with the two children she cherishes in the middle of both the night and the desert...with her drunken nephew at the wheel.

That's just for starters. The entire movie was rife with this sort of inanity, which made it impossible for us to lend credence to anything the movie had to say. And while what it had to say was ostensibly something about our inability to communicate both interpersonally and across cultures, I'm afraid that we are in agreement that all that actually came out of this mess was an intense xenophobia and the conclusion that we are all - without fail or exception - cosmically stupid.

We are used to suspending our disbelief for the sake of film, but we do expect that if we are asked to do this, the filmmaker provides the courtesy of a storyline and plot that will assist that effort. Babel, however, not only does not provide this, but gives us scenario after scenario that is so overwhelmingly implausible as to thwart one's best efforts to go along with it all.

In the end, the only segment of the movie that possessed any heart or believability was the Japanese story line - and by the end of the movie we still only had about one-fifth of what may have been an interesting story there. Too bad. If they had given us that complete story it couldn't have been anywhere near as awful as what we wound up sitting through.