Mothlight is visually stunning. Its subliminal-like images vibrantly flash onto the screen, creating a chaotic display of texture and color. While watching, it is virtually impossible to entirely grasp what is going on but it almost feels like a science experiment, as if we’re looking at various subjects through a microscope. Putting together this film had to have been both tedious and exhausting. I can’t imagine ever pre-visualizing something like this simply because it is so fast and abstract that it must be nearly impossible to completely control.
At times, I felt as if I was watching not just a film but the process of filmmaking. It’s grainy film stock and selected images often call attention to the manipulation of individual frames. In researching about this film I discovered that Brakhage did not use a camera to make it. He collected various moths and what appear to be blades of grass and various other insects and plants and put them on strips of tape which he later printed on film. That is absolutely incredible. I have never heard of anyone being that innovative and artistic with the film medium.
On the Criterion Collection DVD, there is a quote from Brakhage regarding Mothlight which states, “What a moth might see from birth to death if black were white and white were black.” I’m not sure what to make of this statement and how literally I should attempt to connect it to his film. It’s clear that throughout the film there is a certain amount of speed and energy which can be associated with the movement of a moth as it hovers around a light. It’s as if Brakhage uses the intensity and vibrancy of natural images such as grass, plant life, insects and earth to establish the point of view of a moth (or a creature that is extremely aware of and sensitive to it’s surroundings), a perspective that viewers have surely never experienced before. With The Wold Shadow Brakhage creates an intriguing work of art in which his technique is as mysterious as its purpose. What I really loved about this film was it’s manipulation of what at first seems to be a stable and familiar image. Unlike a film like Mothlight in which we are unable to connect with anything, forcing us to free ourselves of comprehension and admire abstraction, The Wold Shadow begins with the comforting and relatively normal image of a wooded landscape. But not too long after the film begins, Brakhage begins to manipulate the subject matter, frantically adjusting the exposure.
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Saturday, March 13, 2010
"This is the art I prefer. The one I think we'll need tomorrow."
Federico Fellini is considered by many to be one of the greatest and most original filmmakers of all time. Having never seen one of his films, I needless to say was very excited to watch La Dolce Vita. This film was definitely not what I was expecting. Its epic length of two hours and forty seven minutes is rather difficult to get through, however not nearly as challenging as Last Year At Marienbad, a film that I will frequently use in comparison. Bridging the gap between Fellini’s Neo-Realist stage (where he co-wrote the classics Rome, Open City and Paisa) and his Surrealist stage, La Dolce Vita seamlessly blends these two completely different cinematic styles, creating a unique spectacle of celebrities and larger than life society.
The nearly three hours of La Dolce Vita are almost in no way plot driven. While there are various moments that result from established situations, the scenes, which are hardly connected, ultimately leave us feeling unfulfilled and carry on far too long for us to focus on a coherent or meaningful plot. Rather, the scenes are connected because of the main character, Marcello Mastoianni, a gossip journalist whose progression or lack of progression primarily drives the film. The film is in many ways a character study about a man whose obsession and decadent behavior consumes him, creating, for me, one of the most unlikeable and (as far as I can tell) static characters ever put on film.
In the article The Catholic Irrationalism of Fellini, Pier Pasolini discusses the idea of decadence and how Fellini’s established style reflects the film’s subject matter. This concept of decadence is extremely interesting when looking at Fellini’s choices regarding cinematography. La Dolce Vita’s camerawork is superb in both its composition and bold contrast between lights and darks. As Pasolini points out, Fellini’s cinematic vocabulary “is highly colored, out of the ordinary, bizarre…” and the film’s aesthetic elements are “always excessive, overcharged, lyrical, magical, or too violently veristic.” Fellini frequently uses long tracking shots to establish his gigantic sets and complex blocking of characters, which at times almost makes us feel as if we are watching scenes from an epic Hollywood musical. However, although he employs exaggerated elements of mise en scene and a lavish execution of blocking, Fellini never calls attention to the camera itself. Unlike Last Year At Marienbad, Fellini forces us to focus solely on the scene and not the manipulation of that scene through camerawork or editing. One might say then that Fellini, who has not yet reached his full stage of surrealism, has not yet reached his full state of decadence (in terms of style), an unrestrained and overtly obvious use of cinematic manipulation. (Not to say that one would need to use these techniques to establish decadent behavior for Fellini’s slight use of neo-realism makes these lavish situations look as if they were captured first hand without alteration.)
La Dolce Vita is fascinating to me. It, much like Last Year At Marienbad, is a beautiful and complex piece of artwork that is more impressive than the majority of films being released today. Sadly however, I think that most of the film is over my head. I am going to try to watch this film and publish another post on it by the end of the semester because it bothers me that I can’t quite figure out where Fellini was trying to go with it. I think what bothers me the most is that while watching the final moments of the film I do feel something, I just don’t know what it is. It’s very strange. We go through the entire film wondering why Fellini is showing us these moments of a man’s life and by the end he provides us with no obvious answers. I actually think that’s what I enjoy most about the film. I like not necessarily knowing what I’m seeing. It makes the film more enigmatic, more like a puzzle, which, to me, is more like real life. And ultimately, it allows me to truly connect with something even if it is so abstract that I can’t quite put my finger on it.
Saturday, March 6, 2010
Last Year At Marienbad
Last Year At Marienbad is one of the most perplexing films I’ve ever seen. The film is confusing not because of its plot (for what little is developed is fairly easy to digest), but because of how director Alain Resnais chooses to present the plot. Its style is clearly connected to Surrealism as it disregards continuity of time and space and presents a narrative that is so abstract one can’t help but think that what we are seeing is without a doubt a man’s never-ending nightmare.
One thing that absolutely blew me away about this film was how much Resnais focused on its form. It seems like so much importance was put on how the narrative should be presented to us in order to make us feel a particular way.That being said, the film has absolutely no coherent structure or form. It is entirely representative of a dream-like or subconscious state. It’s as if we’re not simply following the protagonist through the story, watching events unfold logically. Rather we’re wandering with no restriction, much like the character himself, through various locations and times. The film is almost told from the point of view of the main protagonist’s uncertain mind, and as a result of this we feel the incoherence.
This feeling of circular wandering is established in the very first shots of the film. Last Year At Marienbad begins with various dolly and tracking shots which all move at the same slow speed, showing the large and extravagant setting of an expensive hotel. The fluid camera slowly moves through rooms and corridors, establishing the setting of the film. More so than simply establishing space (For Resnais could have began the film with a static long shot of the entire hotel), these series of shots establish an almost eerie mood and perfectly evoke this feeling of aimless wandering. A very unique voice over accompanies this series of shots as well. One of the first things we notice about the film that seems to be “off” is the fact that the voiceover is being repeated. It’s as if a poem is being read and then re-read multiple times. This adds to the feeling of wandering in circles. We are forced to listen to this haunting repetition of words that, along with the images, feels like a nightmare that we cannot awaken from. Tying everything together is the carnival-like music which, while being somewhat annoying, perfectly accompanies dialogue and image by adding another level of tension to the scene.
As the film progresses we realize that a man, who in the film is unnamed but in the screenplay is known as “X”, has come to this hotel to meet a woman, “A”, that he believes spent time with him in this very location one year ago. “A” repeatedly denies that they ever had a relationship which drives “X” mad for he appears to be certain about their time together. While this is going on a mysterious man named “M” who could be the husband of “A” repeatedly beats people in a game of numbers. As far as what I could recall (and I would like to watch the film again), by the end of the film nothing more is resolved and the characters appear to be forever trapped in this dream.
Now, with all that being said, I have a hard time believing that any of this is real. At no point does the film allow us to connect with any of the characters in a coherent way. Every scene is distorted and disconnected, never providing us with closure. Resnais often includes groups of people talking without any audible dialogue. Then, after a few seconds, we are able to hear the words they are saying only to have the audio get cut off again in the middle of their conversation. Characters could be talking to each other in one location and then switch to a different location in the same scene and even though this sudden change in space occurs the conversation remains unbroken. In one of my favorite sequences of the film, Resnais repeatedly cuts from “X” and “A” sitting in the hotel’s dimly lit bar to a brightly lit bedroom where “A” looks at her broken shoe. This is one of my favorite moments of the film not only because of the beautiful cinematography but because of the way the contrast between the dark and light scenes as well as the hard cuts back and forth create tension and mystery. It’s one of the boldest and most impressive parts of the film.
All of the techniques and narrative choices point to what Resnais appears to be focusing on the most. Rather than establishing a narrative and concentrating on a memorable plot and characters, Resnais focuses on putting viewers into the film, creating a memorable experience.
We discussed in class this idea of solipsism and how the film was connected to the philosophy of Descartes. I’m not going to pretend like I know what I’m talking about in terms of philosophy, but I do think that if you look at Last Year At Marienbad with these concepts in mind you can somewhat grasp what Resnais could’ve possibly been going for.
Solipsism is the idea that oneself is the only thing that we can know is real. Because we cannot prove that everyone around us actually exists, we can never be certain that we are not alone in our existence. Last Year At Marienbad can be looked at as an exploration of this concept. The entire film captures the thought process of a man that is constantly rethinking what happened to him, challenging not only his memory but the existence of people in his past.
One of the most interesting things that I found in the reading’s interpretation of the film was that “X” is the only person’s view we are permitted to see. The reading states, “All we ever have to go on is what X tells us, and what he conveys is uncertainty about alleged facts as much as a report of these facts. What is important is that all the above questions are in principle unanswerable. The film never provides the viewer with the means to tell what is real and what is fictitious.” Because “X” is uncertain throughout the entire film, it made me think of the unreliable narrator and how Resnais uses this narrative voice to the extreme. The film brings together so many elements to create this feeling of uncertainty and disorientation that it in many ways forces us, much like the main character, to look at the world in a solipsistic way.
Just to add some final thoughts that are in no way connected to the rest of this post, I would like to say that this movie is just incredible to me. I can’t believe that the man who made this film is still alive today, continuing to make movies. Last Year At Marienbad just seems like it’s in a completely different league than the majority of films that are currently being released (I do think that there are still exceptions). This film, to me, is clearly a masterpiece and if it came out today it would blow everyone away with its craft and originality. I think that too many movies today (especially Hollywood films) focus entirely on plot and character and not enough on the overall vision and form of the piece. Being a fan of narrative film I think that there is a balance that filmmakers can achieve. I guess I just wish that there were more films coming out today, especially American films, that are as stunning and original as Last Year At Marienbad.
One thing that absolutely blew me away about this film was how much Resnais focused on its form. It seems like so much importance was put on how the narrative should be presented to us in order to make us feel a particular way.That being said, the film has absolutely no coherent structure or form. It is entirely representative of a dream-like or subconscious state. It’s as if we’re not simply following the protagonist through the story, watching events unfold logically. Rather we’re wandering with no restriction, much like the character himself, through various locations and times. The film is almost told from the point of view of the main protagonist’s uncertain mind, and as a result of this we feel the incoherence.
This feeling of circular wandering is established in the very first shots of the film. Last Year At Marienbad begins with various dolly and tracking shots which all move at the same slow speed, showing the large and extravagant setting of an expensive hotel. The fluid camera slowly moves through rooms and corridors, establishing the setting of the film. More so than simply establishing space (For Resnais could have began the film with a static long shot of the entire hotel), these series of shots establish an almost eerie mood and perfectly evoke this feeling of aimless wandering. A very unique voice over accompanies this series of shots as well. One of the first things we notice about the film that seems to be “off” is the fact that the voiceover is being repeated. It’s as if a poem is being read and then re-read multiple times. This adds to the feeling of wandering in circles. We are forced to listen to this haunting repetition of words that, along with the images, feels like a nightmare that we cannot awaken from. Tying everything together is the carnival-like music which, while being somewhat annoying, perfectly accompanies dialogue and image by adding another level of tension to the scene.
As the film progresses we realize that a man, who in the film is unnamed but in the screenplay is known as “X”, has come to this hotel to meet a woman, “A”, that he believes spent time with him in this very location one year ago. “A” repeatedly denies that they ever had a relationship which drives “X” mad for he appears to be certain about their time together. While this is going on a mysterious man named “M” who could be the husband of “A” repeatedly beats people in a game of numbers. As far as what I could recall (and I would like to watch the film again), by the end of the film nothing more is resolved and the characters appear to be forever trapped in this dream.
Now, with all that being said, I have a hard time believing that any of this is real. At no point does the film allow us to connect with any of the characters in a coherent way. Every scene is distorted and disconnected, never providing us with closure. Resnais often includes groups of people talking without any audible dialogue. Then, after a few seconds, we are able to hear the words they are saying only to have the audio get cut off again in the middle of their conversation. Characters could be talking to each other in one location and then switch to a different location in the same scene and even though this sudden change in space occurs the conversation remains unbroken. In one of my favorite sequences of the film, Resnais repeatedly cuts from “X” and “A” sitting in the hotel’s dimly lit bar to a brightly lit bedroom where “A” looks at her broken shoe. This is one of my favorite moments of the film not only because of the beautiful cinematography but because of the way the contrast between the dark and light scenes as well as the hard cuts back and forth create tension and mystery. It’s one of the boldest and most impressive parts of the film.
All of the techniques and narrative choices point to what Resnais appears to be focusing on the most. Rather than establishing a narrative and concentrating on a memorable plot and characters, Resnais focuses on putting viewers into the film, creating a memorable experience.
We discussed in class this idea of solipsism and how the film was connected to the philosophy of Descartes. I’m not going to pretend like I know what I’m talking about in terms of philosophy, but I do think that if you look at Last Year At Marienbad with these concepts in mind you can somewhat grasp what Resnais could’ve possibly been going for.
Solipsism is the idea that oneself is the only thing that we can know is real. Because we cannot prove that everyone around us actually exists, we can never be certain that we are not alone in our existence. Last Year At Marienbad can be looked at as an exploration of this concept. The entire film captures the thought process of a man that is constantly rethinking what happened to him, challenging not only his memory but the existence of people in his past.
One of the most interesting things that I found in the reading’s interpretation of the film was that “X” is the only person’s view we are permitted to see. The reading states, “All we ever have to go on is what X tells us, and what he conveys is uncertainty about alleged facts as much as a report of these facts. What is important is that all the above questions are in principle unanswerable. The film never provides the viewer with the means to tell what is real and what is fictitious.” Because “X” is uncertain throughout the entire film, it made me think of the unreliable narrator and how Resnais uses this narrative voice to the extreme. The film brings together so many elements to create this feeling of uncertainty and disorientation that it in many ways forces us, much like the main character, to look at the world in a solipsistic way.
Just to add some final thoughts that are in no way connected to the rest of this post, I would like to say that this movie is just incredible to me. I can’t believe that the man who made this film is still alive today, continuing to make movies. Last Year At Marienbad just seems like it’s in a completely different league than the majority of films that are currently being released (I do think that there are still exceptions). This film, to me, is clearly a masterpiece and if it came out today it would blow everyone away with its craft and originality. I think that too many movies today (especially Hollywood films) focus entirely on plot and character and not enough on the overall vision and form of the piece. Being a fan of narrative film I think that there is a balance that filmmakers can achieve. I guess I just wish that there were more films coming out today, especially American films, that are as stunning and original as Last Year At Marienbad.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
