โMariaโ serves as the third entry in the unofficial trilogy from director Pablo Larraรญn about iconic 20th-century women during a specific period when they receded from public view. 2016โs โJackieโ examined the role Jackie Kennedy played in the aftermath of her husbandโs assassination, and โSpencerโ took a measured approach to the life of Diana Spencer before her official divorce from the future King Charles of England. To say that โMariaโ is the least all-encompassing of this trilogy is not an insult, but rather a calculated choice on Larraรญnโs part. This isnโt the story about how the consciousness of a nation was thrust on the shoulders of a young woman, but rather a deconstruction of the artifice of celebrity.
โMariaโ stars Angelina Jolie in the role of Maria Callas, the world-renowned opera singer who attained such fame that even those unfamiliar with the โbel cantoโ technique could recognize what an incredible range she had. Although this year has seen an overabundance of musician biopics (including the bland โBob Marley: One Loveโ and the disastrous โBack to Blackโ), โMariaโ doesnโt start with Callas as a child and follow every single defining moment of her career. Similar to both โSpencerโ and โJackie,โย Larraรญn succeeds in narrowing the focus on a period in which Callas faced a reckoning about her legacy. Although there are a few flashbacks to earlier points in Callasโ career, the majority of โMariaโ centers on the week before she died of a heart attack on September 16, 1977.
Jolie is perfectly suited for the role, and not just because of her voice, as she reportedly trained for over seven months to learn opera. Her casting is effective because Jolie has her own experience being in the public spotlight, as her personal affairs have been relentlessly covered by tabloid outlets since the end of the 1990s. It is easy to forget that Jolie started off her career with an Academy Award win for her moving performance in โGirl, Interrupted,โ as her most high-profile projects have mostly been commercial genre films like โMr. & Mrs. Smithโ and โWanted.โ โMariaโ certainly seems like a bid by Jolie to take a stab at serious acting once more, which is befitting for a film about a beloved icon trying to prove to the world that she is still worthy of its admiration.
Jolieโs performance is certainly idiosyncratic, but that is once more a decision that differentiates โMariaโ from both โJackieโ and โSpencer.โ While the First Lady of the United States and a royal Princess were required to maintain a certain level of restraint within their public appearances, Callas was allowed (and even encouraged) to be unabashed in the moments leading up to her shows. While many of her supporters may have claimed to respect her, โMariaโ shows that Callas was also shackled by the enormity of so much praise; the filmโs central thesis is that Callas was always performing, even when she was ostensibly being herself.
Also Read: Pablo Larraรญnโs Top 10 Favourite Films of All Time
โMariaโ does not sanitize Callasโ story, as it is keen to note that she attained enormous wealth during a period in which global class divisions were growing even more radical. However, thereโs a profound emptiness to the way in which cinematographer Edward Lachman frames the shots of Jolie standing within empty buildings, opera houses, and streetways. How could someone adored by generations feel so isolated, and how could she die alone with no one to curb her path of self-destruction? โMariaโ doesnโt seem interested in answering the question definitively, but it does give some insights on the price of adoration. Callas learns that the price of being beloved is that she isnโt necessarily regarded for her individuality, as her voice has become an object of value for those who donโt care about the hard work taken to hone it.
Populating the film with supporting characters was perhaps a risk for a film that is so narrow within its time frame, but โMariaโ does take the time to establish Callasโ relationship with the butler, Feruccio (Pierfrancesco Favino), and her housekeeper, Bruna (Alba Rohrwacher). These roles arenโt fleshed out beyond a few scant references to their other responsibilities, but the few moments in which Callas inquires about their families are quite moving. Favino in particular had a few standout moments in the third act, as Ferrucioโs obligations to remain proper clash with his desire to help Maria in what is clearly a crisis in the making.
If thereโs a real misstep in the broader ensemble it’s Kodi Smit-McPhee in the role of Mandrax, a filmmaker tasked with interviewing Callas. Beyond the fact that it’s a thankless role (and quite derivative of a similar part played by Billy Crudup in โJackieโ), Smit-McPhee seems inserted to show the barrier that Callas put up to the press, which is already underlined by the film in more subtle ways. Smit-McPhee is by no means bad in the role, but it does seem odd that the charismatic young โThe Power of the Dogโ co-star is cast as a haughty, arrogant journalist whose sole purpose seems to be underlining exposition. The same could be said of Caspar Phillipsonโs strange appearance as President John F. Kennedy, a casting choice made even more strange because he also played the same role in both โJackieโ and the controversial 2022 biopic โBlonde.โ
The framing device of โMariaโ may seem a tad conventional for those expecting more radical conceits from Larraรญn, as it is centered around three different โactsโ in Callasโ story that adhere to the film that Mandrax is making. While the 124-minute running time may leave a little too much to breathe at points, โMariaโ benefits from the fact that it is just gorgeous to look at; Lachman, who also shot the Todd Haynes films โFar From Heavenโ and โCarol,โ makes it even more absurd that a majority of viewers will stream โMariaโ on Netflix, and not see it in theaters.
โMariaโ is quiet, contemplative, and at times excruciating because the ending is predetermined. Itโs not necessarily saying something new about the celebrity experience, but the efforts taken by filmmakers like Larraรญn to examine the intersection between gender, fame, and wealth in the 20th century should not go unnoticed. โMariaโ argues that Callas herself deserved better than what she got, and hopefully should lead to a greater appreciation of her legacy.