I’m not sure, but I think that Babies is the only movie this year that I’ve already seen three times. (Movies I’ve seen twice include Inception and Iron Man 2, the latter of which arrives on DVD today.) The first time was my initial screening. After it opened, I brought my whole family to see it in the theater—and we were joined by friends from church—another family with six kids, so there were sixteen of us in all. (We were easily the majority of people in the theater.) And last week I received an advance DVD screener, and my whole family sat down and watched it again. (My second viewing of Iron Man 2 was also via advance screener, watching with Suzanne, who hadn’t seen it in theaters. Suz sees a lot of movies that way.)
Over three viewings, certain images stand out more and more. Some of my favorite moments highlight eye-opening cross-cultural differences, such as the newly postpartum Mongolian mother with newborn Bayar in her arms straddling her husband’s motorcycle behind him for the journey from the clinic back to their yurt. Others are universally recognizable experiences that are the same for grown-ups and babies all over the world, such as sleepy Ponijao in Africa being repeatedly jerked away by her own nodding head. Of course Balmes often contrasts one image with another, the highlight being the intercutting between Bayar’s delight at getting his mitts on a roll of toilet paper and Mari in Japan’s despairing tantrum over her frustration with blocks. At one point she picks up a book, trying to distract herself, but the problem with the blocks has made the sun dark in her eyes, to borrow a Calormene idiom, and for the moment nothing can be right.
The Californian family has been felt by many to be seen in a somewhat critical light. This may not be entirely fair. A New-Agey faux Native American ditty at an infant music class is not one of American culture’s finer moments, but after all the mother isn’t selecting the music (and the image of little Hattie running for the door is pretty funny). I wince a little when Hattie smacks her mother, and her mother’s response is to show her a book called “No Hitting.” Then there’s the shot of Hattie with a banana handing her father peel after peel, and then a bite that she has chewed, taken out of her mouth, put back in her mouth, and then removed again. If Bayar didn’t want to eat something, he might spit it out, but somehow I don’t imagine him expecting his parents to reach out their hands to take the rejected bite.
I love these lines from my friend Jeff Overstreet’s review of Babies:
If more artists would take children seriously in their work, depicting a world in which all human beings—older than 40, younger than 4—are created equal, we might begin to see children treated with greater care and compassion. We might be more careful with the world they’ll inherit. And we might be humbler, remembering just how dependent we were, once upon a time. We might realize that we will be dependent again on these rising generations, who will determine the shape of the world in which we’ll grow old.
But let’s face it: It’s easy to disregard what remains unseen. It’s easy to stop believing that human beings, in the earliest stages, out of sight and out of mind, are of any consequence.
Babies is rated PG for “cultural and maternal nudity throughout.” In other words, it is about families made up of people who have bodies. If your children have bodies, and are aware that other people do too, I see no real reason they can’t see this movie. I wrote more about this in “Don’t Have a Cow, Man!”
Babies is one of the year’s most delightful films. It arrives today on DVD.



Comments
Post a Comment
Can’t wait to see it!
I dunno… I am still not completely sold. I used up a lot of goodwill with my family by making them watch “Where The Passive-Agressive, Manic-Depressive, Mopey, Boring, and Thoroughly Unconvincing Things Are” over the weekend—goodwill which I only managed to restore by taking them to see “Despicable Me” at the second-run theater the next day. I fear that I need another win in the family viewing category (stat!), as my reputation can not afford another snorefest. And with “Secret of Kells” and “How To Train Your Dragon” still a few weeks off I don’t want to morgage what little cache I have left on a documentary that might not hold a 4-year-old boy’s interest.
How is the CG work? Are there any cool connectivity features using BD-Live?
Victor, THIS is the movie to GAIN goodwill. I can’t guarantee that a four-year-old will be mesmerized every minute, but in general anyone should love this movie who is not at least borderline misanthropic or has not otherwise got something wrong with them. Is the four-year-old the only kid in the picture?
Okay, it’s now number #1 in our queue, and should be our Netflix rental for the week! The four-year-old is not the only kid in the picture (so to speak): there’s also a bright 8-year-old who for some reason which I cannot fathom, likes to make snarky (and unfortunately, from the standpoint of enforcing discipline, often hilarious) MST3K-style comments during movies when he starts to lose interest (and I truly have NO idea where he could have gotten that from). When his interest is held, though, he’s there all the way and based on what you’ve written of this in the past I’m confident he’d stick with it.
“...in general anyone should love this movie who is not at least borderline misanthropic or has not otherwise got something wrong with them.”
Wow. I haven’t yet seen the film, but…really? Isn’t that just a teeny tiny bit harsh?
A little hyperbolic and tongue in cheek, maybe, but I don’t think it’s harsh. The appeal of the film is sufficiently tied to the appeal of babies themselves that for the most part appreciation of the movie will closely correlate to appreciation of babies. Or, as A. O. Scott put it:
Of course as Mark Shea has been blogging, some people actually do loathe babies, and for my money anyone who loathes Babies is grievously suspect of belonging to that class.
I don’t deny that there may be the odd viewer with a fully developed love of babies who for whatever bizarre aesthetic or critical reason doesn’t like this particular film about them. But I think that will be a tiny fraction of viewers.
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.