Wittgenstein (1993)

Derek Jarman is easily one of the most original and unique directors in British cinema, if not in the world, and since his death from AIDs in 1994 no one has come close to replacing him. His last film proper (not including the experimental 'Blue') was 'Wittgenstein', an outline of the life and philosphy of Ludwig Wittgenstein, one of the most prominent philosophers of the 20th century.

Jarman cleverly matches the philosophy of his subject with his own filmic techniques, employing the sparse resources of his tiny budget to fantastic effect. Perhaps Jarman's greatest skill was making the best use of what little money he could obtain for his projects, in a creative and constantly surprising way. 'Wittgenstein' is filmed entirely against a black background with little in the way of set furniture and exaggerated costumes, but very quickly this becomes unnoticeable as we begin to accept the film on Jarman's terms. Just as Wittgenstein tried to overcome and solve the problems of philosophy, Jarman attempts to transcend the restrictions of cinematic language to create something entirely new.

The film is narrated by Wittgenstein as a boy, rather arrogant and outgoing. This is in stark contrast to the troubled and introverted adult Wittgenstein, who we see struggling to come to terms with his own philosophy, as well as his own life choices and privileges. Despite being born into an extremely wealthy family in Vienna, and being a highly respected teacher at Cambridge University, Wittgenstein constantly seeks to undermine himself by teaching in a rural school, giving away his fortune or trying to become a labourer in Soviet Russia. Meanwhile, people around him, including the equally great philosophers Bertrand Russell and Maynard Keynes (his teachers, colleagues and friends), constantly look to him for answers and advances, as "the greatest philosopher of our times". In response, Wittgenstein almost renounces philosophy, believing that true logic can not be found in the world and that simple acts can constantly undermine great thoughts. He also refuses to read the philosophy of his forbears, such as Aristotle or Hegel, trying instead to forge a stubbornly independent path for himself.

Similarly, Jarman was largely uninterested in recognition for his films, being far more concerned with creating the art he wanted to, than seeking critical or commercial success. His staging of the film is staunchly independent of other filmmakers, especially his more lavish contemporaries such as Peter Greenaway and Sally Potter. This is partly due to financial restraints, but also tribute to Jarman's ability to see beyond these difficulties and improvise. His task is made easy thanks to his use of regular collaborators like Tilda Swinton and Karl Johnson, in the lead role, or costume designer Sally Powell (perhaps the most successful costume designer working today). His trust in these friends and colleagues enabled him to shoot in a short space of time and in an instinctive way - extremely useful considering he was going blind at this stage.

The film focuses on Wittgenstein's preoccupation with the limitations of language and respective understanding. This is reflected in Jarman's challenging of traditional film narrative. As well as the theatrical staging and heavy use of narration, the plot, developed by Jarman from a script by Terry Eagleton, jumps from location to location with inserts featuring the young Wittgenstein being challenged by a green Martian. This non-sequituur has the effect of forcing us to constantly reassess our expectations of this film. Just as Wittgenstein tried to teach his students to re-examine minor details of day-to-day life and language, Jarman doesn't let us settle into a typical biopic without touches of his usual subversion and characteristic quirkiness. We can not simply accept reality, but are challenged to find the reality within the artificiality of the film, trapped between the engaging narrative and the revelation from the Martian that we are in a studio in Waterloo. Wittgenstein revealed the artificiality of linguistic understanding; Jarman revealed the limitation of escapist cinema.

In his other work, Jarman was extremely varied and versatile. He embraced Queer culture, the punk movement and high art. He was able to work with both 35mm and 8mm, on a public artistic level, and on a personal, introspective level. From his homoerotic debut in Latin - 'Sebastian' - to his cultured 'Caravaggio' and his experimental 'Last of England'. He is sorely missed in British cinema, and it's perhaps most disappointing that no one has taken up the baton from him to be so unique and independent of both the mainstream and art cinemas. He found a kindred spirit in Wittgenstein, a great mind who wanted to see the world in his own way, and not force that on anyone else. I strongly recommend you see this if you have any interest in either film or philosophy, as I can't do justice - partly due to my own limited understanding.

If I look out of my window now, I can see the hospital where both Jarman and Wittgenstein received treatment in their final days.