Mysteries of Lisbon, adapted from Camilo Castelo Branco's classic 19th century novel, was the last film from acclaimed Chilean director Raúl Ruiz. At 266 minutes, it is at the very least a tempting challenge. A test of a cinema-goers endurance, their dedication to film. It has also been lauded as a visual feast and a story worthy of viewers' patience. Dave Gillam, festival director, even went so far as to say that, out of all of the films at the festival, this is the one that people will be talking about in ten years time. High praise indeed, but does Mysteries of Lisbon live up to the hype?
Mysteries of Lisbon reminded me very much of a Portuguese
Les Misérables, weaving together scores of characters and disparate strands of plot that span at least sixty years. Only this story is further complicated by a complex temporality and a web of diegetic narrators. One character will tell their story which includes another character telling his story and so on. Despite the length of the film, even a brief lapse in concentration must be avoided if you want to keep track of who's who or what time period we are in. As the title suggests, the film is full of mysteries. As soon as one is solved more are introduced. I was constantly asking myself "Who? What? Why?" The desire to get to the bottom of every enigma keeps the viewer hooked. Almost all of these mysteries are solved by the end, although one or two do fall through the net. I kept waiting for answers that never came.
Beyond the need to know who people are and how they are linked to the story (we know they must be otherwise they wouldn't be in the film, but when first introduced they seem far removed), the strong central characters keep the viewer engrossed. At the heart of the story is Padre Dinis (played by Adriano Luz), who somehow has a connection with every character. This aspect of the plot is highly unbelievable, yet a voice-over asserts (ironically?) that "In life there are events and coincidences of such extravagance that no novelist would ever dare to invent them". Finding lost parents is a recurring motif in the film, posing interesting questions about identity, as does the fact that several characters have many false names and past lives. Similarly, the instability of social status is highlighted through the character's trajectories. The recurring motif of a puppet theatre suggests that everyone is just playing a role, putting on a persona.
In short,
Mysteries of Lisbon gives a viewer a lot of food for thought. But it also feeds our eyes, with beautiful photography and many sumptuous period costumes and interiors. Ruiz's style of filming through the eyes of gossiping servants, peering through curtains or doors left ajar, also makes for very interesting visuals.
My only real criticism is that I felt disappointed by the ending. Four and a half hours deserves a real climax and I felt short-changed, like it fizzled out. Watching
Mysteries of Lisbon it struck me that if it were a TV drama, the meandering, large cast of characters and eventual denouement would have seemed more appropriate. I later discovered that it was in fact turned into a six-part mini-series. But at least this way we get a strange sense of achievement for making it through the whole, epic story in one go!
