Review of Man of Iron

I believe that the true value of a film lies in the clear exposition of his message (nonverbal, if need be). Two-edged narratives are not my cup of tea, unless any kind of siding is in reason impossible. In this latter case the message is actually nothing but the complexity of life. On the face of it, the Polish film Man of Iron has main characters with a mixed message. Winkel is a reporter, who appears to be fairly satisfied with the Bolshevist regime, and lives the life of a fellow-traveler. He tries to do a good job and steer clear of any extremism. On the other hand, Maciej Tomczyk is an intellectual, who continuously tries to stretch the freedom that is given by law. He regularly lands in prison for a few weeks or months, on the ground of petty verdicts such as littering with pamphlets (he assures the court, that they were all picked up). The characters are embedded in the true happenings at the Gdansk shipyard around 1980. The workers go on strike and occupy the shipyard, because they demand the recognition of their union Solidarinosc (Solidarity). The perseverance in this strike shows that something big is at stake. Tensions are rising. In the Netherlands the shipyard would probably have been cleared after a while, or the union would have called off the strike. So one can grasp the confusion of the regime, who no longer wants to exercise violence against the people that they employ and profess to represent. Remember that in this case the state is synonymous with the enterprise-owner. Of course one might argue, that the occupation is simply a plea for political democracy, but I tend to disagree. Nowhere it is suggested for instance to allow liberal parties. Here the opposition has limited goals. The deeper essence of the story seems to be, that trade unions are indispensable, irrespective of the social system that we live in. Finally an agreement is reached, the regime gives in, and the workers celebrate their victory. What does this mean for the integrity of the main characters, that demand our attention for several hours? who has an evident claim on our sympathy, Winkel, Tomczyk or both? You need to interpret the society, and the ill-informed viewer feels somewhat lost. Although I boost my expertise With respect to the GDR (East-Germany), here the situation is clearly different. The GDR was at least formally a multi-party state - although this did not guarantee democracy. On the other hand, independent unions remained absent. Since Lech Walesa, Anna Walentynowicz, and Jerzy Borowczak play themselves, the narrative apparently shows the perspective of Solidarinosc, and may be called union propaganda if you will. But independent unions appear in all sorts and conditions. Tne story suggests a workers'loyalty towards the catholic church, which comes as a surprise, considering that in the Netherlands the catholic unions faded already in the sixties. The Polish people are obviously different, among others due to the relatively large population of conservative small farmers. We simply witness the establishment of a catholic union in a Bolshevist state. Now we can understand the reporter, representing the interests of the media, who appreciates the freedom and objectivity accompanying social pluriformity, and embraces Solidarinosc after its formal recognition (but not a moment sooner). And we can empathize with the recalcitrant intellectual, who protests against the repression of the working class. Therefore the state of permanent confusion, that pervades all characters in the film, seems justified. Vehement emotions emerge only with the characters representing the most stubborn Bolshevist fanatics, who sense their forthcoming superfluity and oblivion (a circumstance that is also portrayed nicely in the South-American film El juego de Arcibel, surprisingly about a journalist as well). Even in the scene where the reporter wildly thrashes a punching-ball, in all likelihood he just mirrors the thoughts of the nearby security police. Or do we glimpse at the professional frustrations in a strongly controlled society? Deep inside, Winkel would undoubtedly have preferred a social drink. Anyway, in general we just witness people negotiating and groping for moderate social reform.