Showing posts with label ingmar bergman. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ingmar bergman. Show all posts
2/11/12
Bela Tarr's TURIN HORSE
I just saw Tarr's latest (and probably last) movie at The Lincoln Film Center. The movie is much better than his "Man From London" and after "Satantango" it is his most daring work, and in many way it is the closest to the latter.
Out of all the movies he made, this one carries the simplest narrative (and one can argue maybe too simple): description of 6 days in the life of a poor farmer and his daughter. Stormy winds hit their old house and the stable where a horse is kept.
The film opens with a nice long tracking fluid shot where the camera sometimes comes too close to the horse from a low angle and at times it tracks the horse and the farmer from a distance. Day one starts, and the daily "rituals" are shown: getting water from the well, help the half-paralyzed man dress and undress, eating boiled potatoes...etc. Those acts are repeated daily, each day from a different camera perspective but with almost no variation in content. To describe the hard life they live, Tarr succeeds in creating horror from those mundane activities, there are few shots each morning when the father wakes up with a horrifying facial expression; it surpasses in effect any possible dialogue that the character can say. And add to this example many others that also work brilliantly: pealing the boiled potatoes and eating them every day with bare hands; even eating is torture for the characters. Very little words are spoken, but no dialogue is needed with Tarr strong images and actually almost all of what is said doesn't add to the narrative, including the voice-over narration (a la Satantango).
This movie has some of Tarr most haunting images: the mummified facial expression of the farmer that is shown every morning, eating potatoes (reminded me of Van Gogh's potato eaters), the final scene of the movie is a scene that lingers even after the light is out. None of those images are as strong as or as catalytic as the whale scene in W.Harmonies but the abundance/repetition of images in Turin Horse has a cumulative effect.
In Satantango Tarr manipulated time and memory by pushing the limit of cinema storytelling in a seven-hour-long movie, here he tried to achieve this "engraving" and "time condensing" effect with the persistence and repetition of his images. It works -to a lesser degree than Satantango- now I'm 6 hours after the screening and still left with clear visual memories of those six days the characters lived. It is very interesting how this movie does not need to any dialogue, one can watch this movie with no subtitles and still get the same experience.
Turin Horse is like Bergman's Passion and Shame, ominous things occur with no explanation but we know they're adding their weight on the character. In Turin Horse, we don't know why the horse stopped eating, why the well got dry...etc but we feel this ominous feel of entrapment and death. One very strong -and horrifying- image in Turin Horse is when the light went off, not only the gas light, but the actual day light in the middle of the day, that was done brilliantly with no visual or sound effects.
One of the negative things in the movie was the introduction, why did Tarr link this story to a time (1889), a place (Turin), and a historical figure (Nietzsche) ?? Actually one can argue that though this is mentioned in the first scene, there is nothing that states clearly that this the actual "turin horse"; what is said is "nobody knows" (see the first scene below). This relation to the Nietzsche incident can't be taken seriously unless Tarr is explaining why the latter went mad (him realizing the fate of the horse and its owners), this would be a long, and weak stretch. The other explanation is that being an absurd -and not that funny- joke. Had Tarr kept the time and place unrevealed (like in W. Harmonies) this would have added more depth to the narrative and the apocalyptic events (especially towards the end, when fire and light stop to exist) could have been attributed to the present or the future of mankind, as seen by Tarr.
Tarr uses his regulars, it's nice to see Estike, the troubled little girl from Satantango now as a grown up woman. Vig's simple 4-bar soundtrack also works beautifully as usual. Overall I wish I could say that this movie is as good as all the movie I mentioned (except the Man From London) but W. Harmonies, Bergman's Shame and Passion, and even Satantango had all more accomplished narratives.
However if this is really tarr's final work, it is far better than Bergman's Saraband and Tarkovsky's Sacrifice.
8/19/10
4/15/10
10/31/09
10/25/09
Gunnar Björnstrand
Gunnar Björnstrand was Ingmar Bergman's top leading man throughout his films of the 1950s, until time and age ceded that title to Max Von Sydow.
Here is a clip from Winter Light:
Watch Winter Light (1962, Ingmar Bergman) in Culture | View More Free Videos Online at Veoh.com
I wrote:
It is also, if not Björnstrand's best performance, certainly his best in a very important film.
Here is a clip from Winter Light:
Watch Winter Light (1962, Ingmar Bergman) in Culture | View More Free Videos Online at Veoh.com
I wrote:
'Winter Light is simply one of the greatest Socratic dialogues ever put to film, and as close to perfect a screenplay as a mortal is likely to produce. The acting, in every single role, is pitch perfect, yet Bergman regular Ingrid Thulin gives one of the great dominant female performances in film history, as Märta Lundberg, an atheistic substitute school teacher in a small town with a now unrequited love for a Lutheran Pastor named Tomas Ericsson (Gunnar Björnstrand), head of a church whose congregation has dwindled to a handful. The gorgeous Thulin is at her frumpiest and dowdiest looking in this film, and it seems that after an illness, she lost the affection of Tomas, with whom she had lived with for two years.'
It is also, if not Björnstrand's best performance, certainly his best in a very important film.
Labels:
Gunnar Björnstrand,
ingmar bergman,
Winter Light
7/13/09
Bergman on Antonioni
It's odd that Bergman had a general disdain for Antonioni, given that they shared many qualities in their films and views on humanity. Not to mention dying within 24 hours of each other.
But, being a great artist means squat in regards to being a great critic.
7/11/09
L' Eclisse (M. Antonioni)












I was re-watching Antonioni's L'Eclisse, supposedly the final constellation of his trilogy (L'Avventura/La Notte/L'Eclisse). Out of the three I believe La Notte is the most accomplished, yet L'Eclisse always intrigued me. Style wise it has almost the best of Antonioni.
Some professional photographers I know had mentioned on separate occasions Antonioni's work as their favorite in Cinema, and watching L'Eclisse you can tell why. I think even architects (if Gaudi was still alive) would love Antonioni. His fetish for architectural structures is obvious and almost dominates the ending of the movie (look at these three close-ups of a white building).
While watching it, I remembered how Dan once described Antonioni's characters: we're allowed to observe them, as models, but not to explore them. Antonioni doesn't allow them to "open up", we don't know why Vittoria (Vitti) decided to end her long affair with her boyfriend Ricardo, neither we know why she's suffocated (literally) with her overwhelming despair.
I always liked Antonioni's fragmented method of presenting a space, he would introduce the space (inside of a room, a building...) with multiple weird-angled shots of elements inside that space, and doesn't allow us a comprehensive picture until later; i.e. the opposite of a classical spatial presentation. He's also always fascinated by random close-up (see still, tree leaves) something that the Japanese Teshigahara (Woman in The Dunes) used to do a lot too.
Overall why did Antonioni choose to conclude this movie without his protagonists? we are left with backgrounds we knew, places we visited during the movie, but with near-deserted streets and spaces, with a universal impending-doom feeling. Did our couple really not show up for their rendez-vous or did Antonioni lose interest in his protagonists? so he didn't really track them, since their story (irrespective if they reunite or no) is collateral and subjected to a more comprehensive ending... an ending that he hinted at by the final scenes? one shot in this bizarre ending is (see still) this random man reading a journal with the bolded title: "Race for Nuclear War, fragile world peace" and the man facing the almost empty street. Again, this ominous sensation (helped by the musical score) showing on the faces of random people shot. Did Antonioni decided to end his movie (and the trilogy of despair/malaise/alienation) by showing us that the whole world -as we know- is ending.?
On a very different note I noticed an inetersting similarity between Antonioni (especially in L'Eclisse) and a lot of Edward Hopper paintings. Something that makes sense, both dealt with alienation in the modern (mostly urban) world. Antonioni's still of the man outside the front door of a building is an example of that. Even in case of more than one person being present in a Hopper's painting, most of the time they wouldn't be communicating. Both artists were also depicting urban architectural structures in their work.
Bergman once said that Antonioni would put such emphasis on the "photographic" form of his scenes that he'd lose focus on what the scene should deliver. It's inetersting, since that is one of the major differences between the two directors (content and form), while Bergman's work is more "vertical" (trying to explore deep into his protagonists psyche) and he'd amend that by allowing his characters to revisit their past crises by lengthy monologues/dialogues (Persona/Winter Light....) or flashbacks (Wild Strawberries/Cries and Whispers/Autumn Sonata...). Antonioni is more of observing his characters, and their reactions towards their entourage.
I want to listen to the Criterion DVD commenatry once I have some time. I'm also planning to revisit La Notte, Blow Up, and Red Desert. Overall I put L'Eclisse high in a top 5 of his, maybe right under La Notte.
This is the review of the DVD by Dan, these are the last few minutes of the movie.
Wassim
Labels:
edward hopper,
european cinema,
gaudi,
ingmar bergman,
italian cinema,
L'Eclisse,
Michelangelo Antonioni
7/4/09
Bergman Speaks
Just watched the DVD of Bergman Island, and will have a review soon. Meanwhile, here is that doc's director, Marie Nyrerod. Here is a doc for the BBC by the same gal, with much of the footage.
The 3 part series was edited into one film. Gander:
The 3 part series was edited into one film. Gander:
5/2/09
100th Post: Another Woman
Couldn't find any video for this, on of the Woodster's greatest films, a mesh of Ingmar Bergman's Wild Strawberries and Woody.
So, here's the image:

There simply is nothing to fault in this film, from the use of Erik Satie's Gymnopaedie #3 (topping its use in My Dinner With Andre), to the cinematography and screenplay. Perfect. And, as great as she was in her husband, John Cassavetes' films, this is Gena Rowlands' greatest role. Given that my mom is now in hospice care, and near death, I find that deeper, more meaningful art, as this, takes on an even greater power, because what soothes the mind ultimately soothes the soul, but the reverse is not always true.
It's always open, to me, whether this, Stardust Memories, or Crimes And Misdemeanors is Woody's numero uno film. Which do you think?
BTW- this is the 100th post, despite what it might say on the side. One of our co-bloggers has yet to officially post his first post- it's in waiting, so this is 100, despite it stating 99!
So, here's the image:

There simply is nothing to fault in this film, from the use of Erik Satie's Gymnopaedie #3 (topping its use in My Dinner With Andre), to the cinematography and screenplay. Perfect. And, as great as she was in her husband, John Cassavetes' films, this is Gena Rowlands' greatest role. Given that my mom is now in hospice care, and near death, I find that deeper, more meaningful art, as this, takes on an even greater power, because what soothes the mind ultimately soothes the soul, but the reverse is not always true.
It's always open, to me, whether this, Stardust Memories, or Crimes And Misdemeanors is Woody's numero uno film. Which do you think?
BTW- this is the 100th post, despite what it might say on the side. One of our co-bloggers has yet to officially post his first post- it's in waiting, so this is 100, despite it stating 99!
3/23/09
Persona
Ingmar Bergman's 1966 film Persona is the rare instance of style trumping substance, yet also achieving greatness. IN some ways, it reminds me of a poem written by Bruce Ario, which he brought years ago to my Uptown Poetry Group. That poem used cliches in all ten of its lines, yet....the damned thing worked, and was, indeed, a great poem.
No, there's not much depth to this film, if you really analyze it, but what sheen!
The trailer:
Also, gotta love Bibi and Liv!
No, there's not much depth to this film, if you really analyze it, but what sheen!
The trailer:
Also, gotta love Bibi and Liv!
3/21/09
The Hour Of The Wolf
Rewatched Bergman's The Hour Of The Wolf. Many great moments, but still not a great film. A bit too over the top, and had he made the film more equivocal as to whether real or not it would have worked better. But, I got some conversation ideas for my next novel.
Here is its start:
Watch The Hour of the Wolf (1968, Ingmar Bergman) in Horror | View More Free Videos Online at Veoh.com
And here is its trailer:
Gotta love Liv Ullmann and Ingrid Thulin, though.
Here is its start:
Watch The Hour of the Wolf (1968, Ingmar Bergman) in Horror | View More Free Videos Online at Veoh.com
And here is its trailer:
Gotta love Liv Ullmann and Ingrid Thulin, though.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
