Lakatos Hanga - Kálmán nap (2023) - Review

 For the Kálmán nap trailer, click here.

Kálmán nap Review

Directed by Szabolcs Hajdu, Kálmán nap (2023), invites the viewer into the home of the average middle-class Hungarian family and thus makes a—by contemporary Hungarian standards—quite ordinary event, the celebration of someone’s nameday, turn into a spectacle of drama. The entire plot revolves around the struggles of the two protagonist couples and their relationships with each other. Adapted from Hajdu’s stage play, almost the entire plot of the movie takes place in the same room, the living room of Kálmán and Olga. Therefore, the film focuses on the relationships between the characters, rather than their environment. Moreover, by confining the story to this specific room, the director also provides the viewer with a sense of nostalgia, as most such gatherings tend to take place in spaces like that.

            The film builds upon nostalgia and tradition as its background setting: most every Hungarian viewer who watches this will recall their own experience of these gatherings. From the conversation topics—which are either the situation of their children or their respective health issues—till the awkward silences resolved by another round of pálinka of unknown origin, the audience is transported into the Hungarian reality of celebrations between distant friends. Moreover, the recurring exclamations of “Hát igen!” /”Well, yes.”, also evoke a sense of familiarity in the viewer: it serves as a parody of relationships in society, as the phrase is meant to sound politely agreeable while adding nothing of value to the conversation. With this nostalgic and familiar feeling, Hajdu can address an equally common sensation in today’s society, that of loneliness within relationships and midlife crises.

 

Figure 1. 00:10:52

            The two couples are essential to the depiction of these issues. First, Kálmán and Olga, the two hosts, are portrayed as the typical estranged couple. Their conversations consist of platitudes of marriages: how Olga (played by Orsolya Tóth) makes up—sometimes even contradictory—excuses upon excuses to her husband’s sexual advances. As it is later discussed in the film, Olga has grown tired of the mundanity of their marriage and her life in general and wishes to experience something new, not only the “repetitions” her life offers. However, she cannot name the novelty she desires, as she brushes off every offer of Kálmán, saying that would also be only a repetition of a past experience. Kálmán (Szabolcs Hajdu), comes through as an extremely stereotypical character as well, from his refusal to fix anything in his house—complaining meanwhile about the unreliability of handymen—, to his monologue on what is in a man’s nature and what is not. Moreover, he is too immature emotionally to comprehend or even empathise with his wife’s struggles and instead disregards them because they do not make sense to him. His character, and their relationship in general is almost the exact replica of a commonplace joke about married life. They blame the other for all their problems without even trying to understand their spouse’s situation.

            The visiting couple is no different in terms of their portrayals. Zita and Levente convey different, but equally common stereotypes of people and relationship dynamic. The favour they ask, for one, is a perfectly real possibility in today’s Hungary. Moreover, they also represent a sense of boredom in their lives, which can be observed in the film’s structure as well: the numerous long shots of such a confined space brings a feeling of being trapped in life’s monotony closer to the viewer. Zita (played by Nóra Földeáki) is shown to be the driving force of the gathering itself: in the beginning of the film she is the one who calls Olga, almost inviting herself and her husband to their friends’ home. Furthermore, she drives most of the conversations that do not involve another shot of pálinka: for instance, she keeps pushing the request to Kálmán and Olga that would help her son get into a better school, even though she is well aware of how awkward it must be for the others. She is obviously made uncomfortable by the silences in conversation; however, since she does not wish to be seen as rude for leaving early, she brings up any topic she can think of to maintain the discussion. As a result, she shares information about her husband, Levente (Domokos Szabó), that he most likely would have preferred to keep private, such as his greying beard. This way she becomes yet another platitude, that of women being willing to say anything to keep a conversation going, even if that entails sharing private details about a family member with a person they do not know well.

Figure 2. 00:22:48

Figure 3. 00:35:31

            Lastly, the character of Levente is perhaps the least likeable—even though each have their own faults—of all the four present: he is phlegmatic in regards to the conversation in general, taking little to no part in it. Moreover, he keeps criticising the male host on different topics, such as the pálinka’s ingredients or the way the pull-up bar could be installed. As a result, they complete each other with Zita perfectly: his silent nature is balanced by Zita’s over-the-top attitude to maintaining a discussion and keeping everyone cheerful. Furthermore, the character of Levente embodies yet another male stereotype, complaining of feeling sick and still choosing to remain at the edge of the group, all the while being visibly uncomfortable. The awkwardness that this brings can also evoke a sense of familiarity in the viewer. However, his greatest fault in regards to his marital struggles is his cheating on Zita with another woman: the act itself shows an unwillingness to work on his relationship. What is more, the way he tells Olga about it when the other two are absent reveals just the kind of character he is: not only was he unfaithful to his wife, he cannot even be decent enough to say exactly what happened, forcing Olga to piece together the situation from half sentences and Levente’s unease. All of the aforementioned create him in the viewers’ eyes as the epitome of everything that is stereotypically problematic in men.

            The comparison of the two couples’ relationships can be an interesting aspect to look at as well. First and foremost, it is clear that they both have more or less the same issues, primarily because of their apathy towards life in general. However, the way they handle their respective problems is starkly different. As I have said before, the film focuses on the tension between the characters, making this contrast one of the focal points of the plot. The host couple is shown to go into arguments over their issues. Even if those arguments are little more than clichés thrown back and forth, their sentiments are at least articulated, giving a chance of understanding between them. Zita and Levente, however, seem to be a lot more passive in trying to find a solution for their midlife crises. It is clear they have unresolved issues and perhaps even resentment towards each other; what most resembles an attempt to solve it is their very short and explosive argument about Levente’s greying beard. As such, the viewer can see Kálmán and Olga as the slightly healthier couple in regards to their ability and willingness to work on their problems. This film then shows two very different, but—I argue—equally common attitudes towards marital issues today. However, while neither of them is a healthy way of coping, the film in a way provides a ray of hope that these people could work through their issues: the last scene shows them connecting to their respective partners, and sharing a moment of intimacy for the first time in the whole film.

 

Figure 4. 01:08:42

            The character of Ernő (played by Imre Gelányi), the handyman of Kálmán and Olga, is perhaps most engaging compared to the other four people of the story. He brings a sort of outside view to the drama unfolding in the living room, putting it all in perspective: while the two aforementioned couples struggle with where to enrol their child for school and where to buy the best sofa, he has just lost his wife, and his son well before that, making him the one most deserving of the viewer’s sympathy. Moreover, he can be seen as a vehicle through which the other characters’ personalities can be seen: while the two women are nothing but polite—in Olga’s case perhaps a little too familiar—to him, the men are a lot blunter. Kálmán keeps using the informal tone with him, signalling his superiority, while Olga keeps her addresses to him formal, giving him respect. His few interactions with Levente are quite strained, but Zita tries to have a polite chat with him, just like with everyone else. As a result, his few appearances can help, on the one hand, drive the plot, and on the other, give more of an insight for the viewer into the other four people’s characters, based on how they treat him.

            In conclusion, Hajdu’s film manages to turn one of the most commonplace and nostalgic experiences of Hungarian society into an intriguing drama by focusing on the inner worlds of the individual characters, as well as diving deep into their relationships and unearthing the uncertainties within. The obviously stereotypical characters allow Hajdu to comment on today’s society and on its problems, especially regarding human connections. His is a captivating work, in which any viewer can find some of their own questions dealt with, making it an excellent social commentary.