Pan's Labyrinth
Sergi López, Maribel Verdú, Ivana Baquero, Doug Jones, Ariadna Gil and Alex Angulo
Directors: Guillermo Del Toro
112 Minutes
Estudios Picasso
2006
Rating: MA15+

While this much acclaimed film is certainly worthy of study, at least in the technical aspect, and it is visually quite stunning, the themes and in turn the messages behind this story are somewhat questionable.

The obvious issue which comes to mind first is the title itself, which contains the name of the Greek mythical god Pan, one who is associated with male virility and lasciviousness and is at times depicted as a faun or a satyr with anything remotely phallic. The narrative is set in 1944 Spain and begins with a young girl Ofelia (Ivana Baquero) and her sick expectant mother Carmen (Ariadna Gil) arriving at a compound run by a "Fascist" Capitán Vidal (Sergi López). Carmen's husband, and father of Ofelia and the child she is carrying, has died recently and Carmen has now married Vidal. Detesting the captain and her new environment, Ofelia explores some of the ruins in the area, notably a stone labyrinth. One night, she hops out of bed and wanders off to the daedal maze only to meet a surreal figure - a faun who has an ostensible pair of ram horns, which is an obvious satanic and occult symbol in itself. His behavior is also very suspicious as he refrains from introducing himself, dodges Ofelia's questions, ambiguously offers to help by setting her difficult and nightmarish tasks as well as occasionally shuddering and caressing her face when he is speaking to her. That is not to say a film cannot have a faun in it, since it is fantasy, but it is the complex amalgamation of all the elements which determine whether a given film is tolerable. It is the combination of such sexual imagery (even though the faun does not verbally express any sexual desire), especially in this case when Ofelia is presented as the "pretty, innocent and helpless young girl" that it is practically encouraging pedophilia and sadism.

The third and final task which Ofelia is set is also interesting theologically. The "blood of an innocent" is demanded and there is the question of the validity of the substitutionary sacrifice. Of course, offering oneself in selfless sacrifice is a noble act and there is merit but is it always satisfactory in the sense that it fulfils the conditions of the sacrifice and achieves what the sacrifice is suppose to achieve? Had the demand been "blood" then perhaps yes. However, since the demand was "innocent blood", then can that be replaced? That is not unlike saying the substitutional sacrifice can itself be substituted. Or a more shocking example: as Christians, we know God demanded a price to be paid which humanity could not so He paid it Himself but the train of thought this film suggests is that the "innocent blood" which Christ shed could be/have been replaced. That is a lie, albeit a subtle one and does not follow the principle of substitutionary sacrifice, at least not in the absolute frame.

This film is also promoted as a piece of art which testifies to the power of the imagination. Without a doubt, imagination is a powerful and wonderful God-given gift and it certainly has a place in life. However, what does the imagination of Ofelia achieve in this story? She does not like her new circumstances and she wanders off in more ways than one. It is understandable as many people in her situation, children and adults, would do just that (and quite possibly worse) but to what end? Does her imagination really and truly take her away from her difficulties and/or solve all of life's problems? It almost seems as if Ofelia's imagination is only an escape to another nightmare. In this tale, and often in reality, her imagination is not unlike the character of the faun. Of course, one has to consider whether the film claims that the imagination is meant to solve life's hardships. Given the "liberating" ending, it is as if it wants to communicate that it does, although that point is ambiguous and parts of the narrative argues both ways but probably leaning towards the affirmative.

The other interesting issue is a historical one, one which Spain is still divided over. It is almost comical how Capitán Vidal is presented as the clichéd 'inhuman fascist pig' fighting under Franco and that the other side, described only as "red" by Vidal, is presented as a bunch of humane and decent folk. One could argue these characters were not meant to be an epitomization of the two sides in the Spanish Civil War but given the tone, that is very doubtful. Let us not forget that the republicans did their share of killing and that many priests, nuns and lay Catholics were martyred by them. Of course, that part was all conveniently left out in the story. On second thought, it also begs the question whether Ofelia's imagination is meant to represent the writer and director's political stance.

There is no denying that this film is brilliant technically but given the occult, sexual and historical messages, it is at the very least questionable if not downright inappropriate. As for the power of imagination - yes, one cannot deny its power and that it has a rightful place in life but it is not always useful and does not always solve life's problems.