The Golden Globe nominations are out and Babel leads the way with seven, including a not-so-deserved one for Brad Pitt as Best Actor in a Supporting Role, though he admittedly delivers a performance above his usual average.Babel follows in the footsteps of last year’s Crash (and 21 Grams and Traffic) in its attempt to mix technical and cinematographic audacity and originality with political reflection and currentness. But if Crash could not get away with its blatant arrogance and cheap intellectualism (which it did as far as the Academy goes), Babel does; not fully, but enough to leave you in a state of reflection, and probably of confusion as well.Beautiful to watch and to listen to, technically masterful, remarkably well acted by most of its protagonists, especially by Adriana Barraza and Rinko Kikuchi, Babel proves that Alejandro Gonzales Inarritu, after only a handful of films that include Amores Perros and 21 Grams, is already one of Cinema’s most accomplished talent.

So, what is Babel about? Some critics seem to believe that a lack of clear answer to this question is Babel’s weak point. And that in his attempt to tackle such an ambitious project, Inarritu has built his own tower of Babel, a monument of such arrogance that it can only lead to confusion. But even this image cannot be so clearly established in connection with the director’s true intentions. Perhaps that is exactly the point, to build such a tower, to confuse, to not provide easy answers and to let the audience immerse themselves into this cinematic experience and to draw their own conclusions.

What I believe is quite clear, is that Babel is about the now. It is about the 21st century, about the direction our society is taking and the challenges we face as human beings. Within this larger sphere of thinking, one can also pick up on racial tensions and prejudices, cultural identity, global consciousness, terrorism, chaos theory and its butterfly effect, globalization and modernization, loss of traditional values and so on…
Oh yes, there is plenty to chew on in this film. But focusing on just one or two of these issues can lead to confusion as one attempts to explain rationally how this one particular ‘theme’ is dealt with in the film, and possibly, some will hope, how it is resolved. But Babel can only make sense if we look at all of these themes together, connected, as part of a greater challenge that modern society faces. If the world is getting smaller, why are so many new distances created? Can we take the necessary next step towards global consciousness? Can we take advantage of the new connections that are being created or will we destroy it all through prejudices, selfishness and arrogance? Are we ready for the next stage of our evolution? These are testing times for our world, and Inarritu’s film reflects this tension and it questions our drive, motivation and abilities to stand the test.

It seems that Inarritu himself believes that we are not ready. The characters in Babel are part of this test, but they seem lost in the midst of a revolution they are unable to control. What starts as a good intention is rewarded with a negative outcome. Even the ‘happy ending’ for the American couple is treated sarcastically by the Japanese broadcaster…The only trace of hope lies in Babel’s most interesting story, that of the Japanese teenager Chieko who, at the end of the film, does not take the step we expected her to. But even this hope is muted by the very last shot of the film, an artificial shot that isolates her in an ever-growing sea of modernity and anonymousness.