"Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain". An elderly doctor is approached by a woman with a complicated request. Her husband is gravely ill and may die, and she is ...
See full summary »
"Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain". An elderly doctor is approached by a woman with a complicated request. Her husband is gravely ill and may die, and she is pregnant by someone else. If her husband dies, she wants to keep the child, but not otherwise, and she wants the doctor to give him an honest verdict on his chances. But the doctor is disturbed by her request, because his answer will directly affect the life or death of another human being. Is he entitled to play God?Written by
Michael Brooke <email@example.com>
The weakest of the Dekalogs. A stumble for the great director.
Linking this piece with the Commandment upon which it is based requires a stretch of the imagination that borders on Einsteinian physics. If you don't believe me, just read the other comments & reviews; everyone seems to have a (different) vague idea of how it relates to "Thou shalt not take the lord's name in vain", but the truth is that it's a non-sequitur story idea which Kieslowsky later beat into obscure religious context for the sake of his miniseries. It reminds me of a "B side" song which a band throws together for the sake of completing an otherwise good album.
I love the other Dekalogs. They are lucid, poignant and creative. But in #2, aside from the visual showcase (the famous bee scene which I didn't find all that impressive--all he did was throw a bee in a glass and film it for 28 seconds), I found nothing compelling or challenging to the mind. This is a very linear story which is more of an anecdote than a movie.
I still admire Kieslowsky, but this definitely made me lose some respect for the man. I'd skip it if I were you.
5 of 46 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this