Writer Guillermo Arriaga and Director Alejandro González Iñárritu have a style. The three movies they have done together (Amores Perros, 21 Grams and Babel ) tell three or four distinct stories that intercept at some key points. They also tend to jump around in time and to tell the same situation from multiple points of view.

However, within that style there is space for great variation. In Amores Perros each storyline is told from beginning to end, and then the next story follows. In 21 Grams the stories are told in an inter winded fashion, and they have many points of connection. The film also showcases a lot of jumping in time, with each scene being set either in the past or in the future of the last scene. Babel is somewhere in between. The stories are inter winded, but although there is some movement in time as we jump from one story to the next, each separate storyline only moves forward.

The funny thing is, Amores Perros is still my favorite of the three, despite having the least complex storytelling. That movie was just a little slice of perfect, with each storyline being powerful on its on, but also adding up to something bigger. Although I was amazed at the complexity and skill involved in telling a story in the way 21 grams did it, I felt it ultimately detracted from the core emotional power of the story instead of adding to it. Also, there was a sense that too much time was spent making the trick work and not enough making the story a involving and meaningful one.

Babel does not commit the same mistake. It’s fractured storytelling works just fine, and you never get the feeling it is taking the front seat of the movie, instead of the actual characters and situations. And yet, it doesn’t quite reach the same level of Amores Perros, because the individual story lines aren’t quite as good. More ambitious, sure. But not quite so successful.

In Babel we have essentially two storyline occurring in Morocco, one in America and Mexico, and another one in Japan. In Morocco we have a somewhat poor family of farmers. The father ( Mustapha Rachidi, I think) buys a rifle to shoot at coyotes, but his sons (Boubker Ait El Caid and Said Tarchani) end up using it to shoot at a bus. Why? I’m not sure either.

The bus shooting leads to the second Moroccan storyline in which an American couple (Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchett ) is traveling through the region, trying to rebuild their marriage after the death of their baby son. They are in the Bus and the woman ends up getting shot. They must deal with that despite being in the middle of the desert with no hospital nearby.

Meanwhile, back at home their Mexican nanny (Adriana Barraza) has to go to her son’s wedding. But with the parents stranded in Morocco she has no one to leave the kids with. So she takes them with her to Mexico, with bad consequences.

Finally, we have the Japanese storyline, in which a deaf and mute teenager (Rinko Kikuchi) has to deal with her condition, the death of her mother and her own sense of alienation.

All the stories deal with the difficulties of communication, either because of language barriers or because of emotional ones. The Japanese part is especially good at showing how the difficulty to communicate can isolate someone and lead to destructive behaviour in an attempt to connect with someone. The Mexican/American one is especially good at showing how misunderstanding can lead to anger, to impulsive decisions and to a world of hurt. The Moroccan story lines are supposed to build in some of the same themes, but - and here is the movie’s main problem - they simply aren’t as effective as the other ones.

Why aren’t they as effective? A number of reasons. First, they feel more contrived. There are way too many coincidences and way to many characters taking actions that make little sense. So the outcomes and the drama feel forced and pre-ordained, instead of arising naturally, like they do in the other parts of the film. Also, despite how much I love Cate Blanchett and respect Brad Pitt and the choices he has been making, their performances leave something to be desired. They never quite connect.

The film also feels a little long on the tooth. There are moments o great emotional drama here, but maintaining this high level of emotion during a long time is almost impossible. So, the film reaches a really high point about midway but ends up faltering a little as time passes before finding itself again in the end.

I don’t see how to make the film shorter without cutting one or two of the story lines. My choice would be the American couple portion, which is the one the adds the least to the film. I think the simple exclusion of this storyline would have already made the movie significantly better.

But now I’m being way to negative. I loved Babel and think it’s one of the best films of the year. It’s uneven, but it’s high are really high, and it has a lot to say. I just thought it could have been even better.

And for that matter, I also really liked 21 Grams, and heartily recommend you watch it. After you catch Amore Perros, that is.

P.S. : The blond girl in the movie looks spookly similar to a younger Dakota Fanning.
P.S.2 : Someone behind me in the cinema kept thinking everything was really funny. I guess you really can’t argue about sense of humor.