Z (1969)

In 1963, the left wing socially conscience Greek Politician Grigoris Lambrakis was assassinated by right wing groups associated with the Greek military.   Events following the assassination eventually led to a military coup of the civilian Government.   Costa-Gavras was a young filmmaker who was enraged by the events happening in his country.   In 1969 he received financial backing from France and Algeria to direct the events leading to and, immediately after the assassination.   The resultant film is, “Z” (which is a popular Greek protest slogan that means, “He Lives”), and with this film he created the benchmark movie on how to make a good political thriller.  

The movie was filmed in French and incorporated some of the best French actors at the time.   Since the filmmakers wanted to avoid legal issues, Costa-Gavras decided to keep most of the leading characters nameless.  We know them only through their roles.   The main Politician who represents Lambrakis is “The Deputy” (the great French entertainer Yves Montand).   The Examining Magistrate who represents the real-life Greek prosecutor, Christos Sartzetakis is played by the excellent Jean-Louis Trintignant and Jacques Perrin of Cinema Paradiso fame plays the Photojournalist in one of his first roles.    To give the film a more Greek authenticity, the great Greek actress, Irene Papas, was cast in the small but pivotal role of, “The Deputy’s wife”.  The movie was also filmed in Algeria to show a Mediterranean environment similar to Greece, since at the time the film was shot, the military Junta which ruled the Greece would never have allowed the movie to be filmed there.   

The movie is divided into two distinct sections.  The first being the buildup to the assassination, and the second being the aftermath and investigation of the killing.   In the first section “The Deputy” and his entourage are trying to hold a political rally and are rebuffed at every turn by the local politicians, the police, and the Army, who use security as their main excuse.     This forces the rally to be held in an open outdoor location which is the least secure area possible.   Within this framework the current rulers and keepers of peace in the host city are shown as being extremely hostile to the politics of the Deputy and his party.  This is also the section which introduces us to the hired thugs who perform the actual killing, with their simplistic plan and execution of the assassination, resulting in the ease of their discovery.  

The second section deals with the investigation into the killing, and the slow unraveling of what actually occurred.   The Prosecutor, in order to investigate the killing, which was being called a traffic accident, initially begins his investigation in trying to confirm the occurrence as being nothing more than an accident.  He is an honest man and the movie shows how the consistent pressure placed on him by the authorities works to strengthen his resolve in finding the truth as to what happened.   At one point the countries’ attorney general even threatens his career.  Trintignant portrays the Prosecutor with a stone face that only hints at what he is really thinking.   Here and there his true thoughts are shown through quite angry responses.   It is a marvelous performance.   The final section concludes, as the true story does, initially with satisfaction of it’s Hero’s actions (Trintignant), and finally with an epilogue that recalls the actual events that occurred following the investigation, which is an honest take on what actually occurred, and far from emotionally satisfying. 

Costa-Gavras” film style incorporates cinema verite documentary style camera work with the quick cutting suspenseful editing of a very good action film.  This is the movie that wrote the book on how to make a good political thriller.   There are quite a few action scenes revolving around the actual assassination and the search for the killers that merge wonderfully with the fascinating scenes of Trintignant’s investigation.  Flashbacks are used cleverly, hinting at how each person’s beliefs drives their interpretation as to what they have seen.   Questioning the validity of eye witness reports becomes something that is very plausible, and the movie does an admirable job in pointing this out clearly. 

Filmmakers can’t help themselves in having their own beliefs effect their films, and Costa-Gavras who was a left wing sympathizer is a great example of how this is true.  Most of his movies, while made as entertaining works of art verge very close at being propaganda pieces.   “Z” is a great example of this.   All of the characters portraying the side of the Greek right wing authorities, from the Politicians, police, and military officers, are very caricature-like, containing almost no depth.    The characters portraying the side of the victims and left are on the other hand shown with more emotional depth.    This is a great way to get the viewing audience to empathize with one side or the other.   In “Z” this works brilliantly as I found myself getting angry at the injustice of it all.

 I like to compare this movie to Pontecorvo’s, “Battle of Algiers”.  Both films are made by left leaning directors who clearly have a preference to one side over the other in their movies conflict.   It is Pontecorvo however who makes an effort to add intelligence and depth to the opposing side.  Costa-Gavras does not even pretend to make an effort. 

I was also very surprised to see that Costa-Gavras chose to illustrate one of the right wing thugs as a gay predator.    Hollywood was known to do this in countless films as many movies made in America at the time were clearly homophobic.  I was surprised that Costa-Gavras being left wing and a supposed humanist would lower himself to this level.

When watching, “Z”, I prefer to ignore the politics, and instead view it as an intricate political thriller.   When seen this way it is a superb and exciting movie that kept me glued to my seat.