No Bears - Movie Review

Critics Score - 7 of 10

General Audience Score - 3 of 10

There are certain countries that year after year manage to produce fantastic films, the artists and voices that arise from them continually impress film pundits around the globe. Those countries include many that would normally be associated with art, such as Italy, France and England, but there are also films coming from so many other places, such as South Korea, Mexico, Israel and Iran. Iran in particular has many fantastic filmmakers working today, but the government there sometimes conflicts with the free voices that artists typically have and the ruling powers can cause problems for the filmmakers. The writer/director Jafar Panahi is one such voice who’s latest film No Bears is a fascinating look at this dynamic as in December 2010 he was sentenced to six years in prison and banned from making movies, writing screenplays and the like for twenty years. No Bears is an intriguing piece of cinema as he tries to film a movie in secret while under ban from leaving Iran. Panahi was arrested in July 2022, shortly after the No Bears finished filming last May, which then debuted at the Venice Film Festival in September to acclaim. While the film represents rights and freedoms for artists, critics and film pundits will sing it’s praises, but the film’s meta nature will leave general audiences scratching their heads and wondering what No Bears is all about.

SYNOPSIS - Our trip into the world of writer/director Jafar Panahi (played by himself), begins with some footage of a narrow city street, with shops and signs out front, some pedestrians walking leisurely along an middle eastern street, one man carrying a bundle of goods upon his head. A man we cannot see is yelling out to the passers by what I presume to be what goods he has for sale. A man in a black coat and hat emerges from a side street pushing a cart covered in a white sheet, on top there’s a pack of cups or containers and a tall golden pot with steam or smoke coming out of the spout. The camera pans around, following the man up the street, but instead of staying with him, it keeps going to a restaurant where we see a waitress serving customers, she drops off a tall mug of beer to a man before getting a phone call. The man on the phone is nearby, he walks up a side street to the restaurant and the waitress converses with him a bit before heading back inside when suddenly a man yells “Cut!” before walking in front of the camera. We soon understand that what the camera sees, we are seeing the same thing as the director of the movie is from his offsite location, Jafar Panahi, who is across the border in Iran. He’s been prohibited from leaving Iran, so we watch as he begins virtually speaking to his actors and the on site director.

Because No Bears follows this format periodically, it follows two story lines, we see some sequences of of the film and actors, the rest is supposed to be Panahi as he deals with some other issues surrounding his stay in a town across the border. Thus it embraces some very meta qualities that come with the concept of a movie whose star is the director and his efforts to virtually make a film right across the Iranian border because he can’t leave or make movies there. It’s like me writing a story about me writing this film review. He entered Starbucks and purchased his favorite drink, a large iced caramel brûlée latte with oatmilk and two pumps of sweetener. He sits down and begins to type these words on his phone after downloading the No Bears IMDb poster and adding it to the top of his blog posting. These elements, however engaging for cinephiles and critics, will prove to be a source of frustration and confusion for many general audiences. But the main story line chronicles the events surrounding Panahi’s time in this remote town, and some drama that surrounds his dealing with the city officials. This is the screenplay hard at work, creating situations that make us think about the director’s creative process and what he’s trying to say via the situations and dialogue his character encounters. This film is very much about the control that governments, in this case Iran, will look to exert over it’s citizens, to influence the narrative of the voices and activists that are telling their stories, but also to stifle and rob others that they fear will speak out against them.

With Panahi appearing in the film as himself, it plays more like a documentary than it does a feature film and makes you wonder through the first act what scenes are staged and what aren’t. But the film is very light on production costs, with very little cinematic flair with the expecting of a few cinematic shots, again, making this more akin to a simple documentary than a grandiose Hollywood production. There are no songs, no music or original score, no visual effects, no flashy editing, none of the bells and whistles that accompany a film that’ll garner a lot of ticket sales.

After some research and reflection about the director and the fact he’s currently under arrest, granted there was some reading in between the lines to do, No Bears slowly became ever more fascinating. In the film, some of the local townsfolk get up in arms about the picture I mentioned that a boy says Panahi took with his camera. Panahi speaks with some of the men about the boy’s accusations, he says, “You’re accusing me with the same testimony that you now say is illegal?”. The film reflects the hypocrisy that’s highlighted in the legal systems of the Iranian government that’s teetering on the edge of authoritarian rule, from the little I’ve read on the situation. Later Panahi is on his way out, a man stops him and declares “The path is not safe! There are bears.” The man subsequently brings him inside to drink some tea and give him unsolicited advice and his opinions on his situation, telling him to keep the peace, even if it means lying under oath. Upon leaving Panahi asks if it’s safe because of the bears. The same man who told him there were bears a few minutes prior then exclaims, “There are no bears. Nonsense! Stories made up to scare us! Our fear empowers others. No bears!” A powerful and unsettling response. When broken down, in the context of the film, “no bears” is simply a lie meant to control or manipulate in order to exert an amount of influence over an individual. Looking at this same idea through the lens or the context of governmental control, this is a very powerful and sobering reality for filmmakers and really anyone that isn’t free to voice their opinions and ideas. I found many of the film’s references to be directly critical of the manipulative and controlling aspects of any institution, organization, religious entity or government. We need the freedom of speech to exist so that individuals who have forward thinking ideas, dreams and visions about humanity to be able to express these ideas in any medium they deem appropriate or necessary, barring these ideas don’t hurt others. No Bears is an important movie, despite the disconnect it will have from mainstream audiences, in telling a story of cultural, ethical and moral significance, and one that we all should be paying attention to.

SUMMARY - As a form of art, cinema and the artists that lend their voices to making some of these works are something that need to be protected and preserved. Panahi puts on display the need to be aware of the dogmatic thinking that is ever present in human nature, especially for those in power, that will try and force their beliefs or ways of doing things on others. Anyone who loves freedom should try and bear the latest film from Jafar Panahi, No Bears.