The Turin Horse (Bela Tarr, 2011)

[FerdinandGriffon]

I'm not crazy about the film, but that's a hell of a release.
Cinema Guild: believe the hype!

[warren oates]

Second FG's praise of this exceptional release of an exceptional film. Even if you were putting it out bare bones in HD, with, say, maybe a booklet essay only, it would be a candidate for release of the year. But you've really outdone yourselves with this package. I'm crazy about the film and about Cinema Guild. You guys are my favorite smaller label. I can't wait for Faust (hope, hope) and the other Sokurov titles you've been working on.

[MichaelB]

The UK poster:

[zedz]

Very nice. Who knows if it'll work, but who knows if anything would work with this film?

[Grand Illusion]

More words on that poster than spoken in the film.

[MichaelB]

More words on that poster than spoken in the film.

...assuming you walk in during the opening shot and miss the spoken introduction.

And you'd have a good excuse now, since the poster handily reproduces it in its entirety.

[MichaelB]

Since Tarr doesn't actually dramatise Nietzsche's encounter with the horse, here's Liliana Cavani's interpretation (from Beyond Good and Evil, 1977), with Erland Josephson as Nietzsche.

Clearly, Tarr must have thought that it was impossible to top that, hence the black screen and solemn Hungarian recitation.

[Grand Illusion]

More words on that poster than spoken in the film.

...assuming you walk in during the opening shot and miss the spoken introduction.

And you'd have a good excuse now, since the poster handily reproduces it in its entirety.

Well, yes. I meant in the film proper. And if you really want to get technical, you can begin counting the number of words in the visitor's rant halfway through the film once you get the DVD.

[colinr0380]

While we are on the subject I would definitely recommend the episode of Human, All Too Human that give me a handy primer on Nietzche's philosophies (including of course the Turin Horse episode).

[wigwam]

Finally got to see this last weekend. They had asked Tarr to come for a Q&A but they said he lives in a village 3 hours by horse (?!) from Budapest

I loved it, it's just behind Werkmeister for me, but the music might even be better in this than that.

I noticed something about the structure, which I'll put in spoilers in case anyone hasn't seen it yet (not that it's a plot-heavy spoiler-typa film at all, but...)

SpoilerShow

Uncreating the Universe / Reverse Genesis

Genesis | Turin Horse

First day: Light is commanded to appear ("Let there be light!") The light is divided from the darkness, and they are named "day" and "night".[Gen 1:3]

Sixth day: Light has completely disappeared. Even oil lamps filled with oil won't catch flame. [is this the anti-Hanukkuh?] There's no distinction between day and night.


Second day: God makes a firmament ("Let a firmament be...!")—the second command—to divide the waters above from the waters below. The firmament is named "skies".[Gen 1:6–7]

Fifth day: The water from the well has disappeared. They take off across land but soon return [anti-Exodus] as the land is all the same now (the visitor having stated the town blew away leaving only ruins). When they return, the sky goes completely black.


Third day: God commands the waters below to be gathered together in one place, and dry land to appear (the third command)."earth" and "sea" are named. God commands the earth to bring forth grass, plants, and fruit-bearing trees (the fourth command).[Gen 1:9–10]

Fourth day: The gypsies come, using up finite resources and leaving behind some sort of Nietschzean catechism reiterating the Visitor's monologue abt humans abusing anything the earth offers.


Fourth day: God puts lights in the firmament (the fifth command) to separate light from darkness and to mark days, seasons and years. Two great lights are made to appear (most likely the Sun and Moon, but not named), and the stars.[Gen 1:14–15]

Third day: The horse refuses to leave the barn. A visitor arrives to buy vodka and deliver news of the destruction of civilization and the Nietzchean implications of its destruction.


Fifth day: God commands the sea to "teem with living creatures", and birds to fly across the heavens (sixth command); he creates the "great sea creatures" and the creatures of the sea and the birds according to their kinds.[Gen 1:20–21]

Second day: The horse refuses to pull the cart once harnessed.


Sixth day: God commands the land to bring forth living creatures (seventh command);[Gen 1:24–25] He makes wild beasts, livestock and reptiles. He then creates humanity in His "image" and "likeness" (eighth command). They are commanded to "be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it." To this point has seen his work on each day and described it as "good"; now the totality of creation is described by God as "very good."[Gen 1:26–28]

First day: Humanity dominates animal but is also dominated by nature, and nothing is very good or good, but incredibly bleak and windy.

[Grand Illusion]

I noticed something about the structure, which I'll put in spoilers in case anyone hasn't seen it yet (not that it's a plot-heavy spoiler-typa film at all, but...)

SpoilerShow

The Reverse Genesis

is definitely a good way of reading the film. I appreciate your write-up, but I feel the interpretation works better as an overview of the nihilistic acts of nature, rather than as a day-by-day analysis. I think it really only matches up supremely well on Days 5 and 6.

[cinemaguild]

They've arrived.

[ando]

Where??? No one has it in NYC. Is it only available by mail-order?

[Grand Illusion]

Got my DVD in the mail. Looking forward to listening to the commentary. Easily my favorite film of the past ten years.

[Robin Davies]

Just watched this for the first time but I think it'll take a further viewing before it really settles. At the moment it feels less impressive than Tarr's previous four films but perhaps it will grow on me like The Man From London has.

SpoilerShow

I'm probably being rather shallow here but I was really bugged by the "windstorm" which seemed as phony as the robin at the end of Blue Velvet. The trees a few yards away weren't moving at all! Assuming this was intentional did this mean that it was a personal windstorm that was only aimed at these poor characters? When the father said they were moving out I half-expected the daughter to say "Yeah, we really must get away from this wind machine."

[cinemaguild]

DVD Beaver on THE TURIN HORSE blu-ray - http://www.dvdbeaver.com/film4/blu-ray_ ... lu-ray.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[dustybooks]

I wasn't bored for a second. Seriously.

This was my experience as well. Was pretty thrown by how engaged I was... and to boot, I was watching in hardly the most ideal or cinematic conditions -- sick in bed, on my laptop via Netflix instant. But I thought the movie was visually ravishing for its entirety, and that its running time flew by. Then again, I knew very well what to expect from reading this thread, even though it's my first Tarr.

My favorite moment, by the way, was

SpoilerShow

the slow pull-in to the daughter gazing out the window after they gave up on leaving and unloaded the cart. Nearly every shot was gorgeous, though.

I loved the film, but I have to admit that after a certain point I started to find its sheer bleakness sort of... humorous, even though I was spellbound by

SpoilerShow

the apocalyptic solemnity of the last hour. This will probably make me sound like a teenage jackass but I found myself vividly imagining the way Mel Brooks could parody the scene in which the visitor asks for brandy and goes on his rant. I know, I know.

[Grand Illusion]

I wasn't bored for a second. Seriously.

This was my experience as well. Was pretty thrown by how engaged I was... and to boot, I was watching in hardly the most ideal or cinematic conditions -- sick in bed, on my laptop via Netflix instant. But I thought the movie was visually ravishing for its entirety, and that its running time flew by. Then again, I knew very well what to expect from reading this thread, even though it's my first Tarr.

My favorite moment, by the way, was

SpoilerShow

the slow pull-in to the daughter gazing out the window after they gave up on leaving and unloaded the cart. Nearly every shot was gorgeous, though.

I loved the film, but I have to admit that after a certain point I started to find its sheer bleakness sort of... humorous, even though I was spellbound by

SpoilerShow

the apocalyptic solemnity of the last hour. This will probably make me sound like a teenage jackass but I found myself vividly imagining the way Mel Brooks could parody the scene in which the visitor asks for brandy and goes on his rant. I know, I know.

You're not alone in finding Tarr's work humorous. He's even stated that this is his first film that's not a comedy. But Turin Horse is very much in line with the absurdity of Samuel Beckett, which is indeed hilarious.

I was in a theater and I laughed out loud at the

SpoilerShow

looooooooooooong trek over the hill. And then they just reappear and come back to the house. All in one shot. Just perfectly bleak absurdism.

[Zot!]

So, Turin Horse. I dunno. I've watched this now, and I think I have seen all of Tarr's defining works. I don't think I can subscribe to his genius. The approach just feels too affected, and I feel that some of the praise he gets is a result of the alien novelty of it all.

SpoilerShow

The inconsistant wind in the foreground vs the background drove me mad, to a point where I could look at nothing else. I think this was a good case for some minimalist CGI.
Instead of bothering to argue this one with the large number of members who held this in high regard, I thought I would mention that I can't believe this hasn't been compared to Melancholia! It's virtually the same film made by different directors in their own style. Horses and everything.

[zedz]

Your second spoilered point has been mentioned by various people (including me), but only obliquely, because it's a spoiler. And beyond making the observation you made, there's not really much to say about it!

[markhax]

Your second spoilered point has been mentioned by various people (including me), but only obliquely, because it's a spoiler. And beyond making the observation you made, there's not really much to say about it!

It is also a feature in Satantango, in that scene in the second episode where Irimias and Petrina walk to the police station. It was my son who pointed out to me that the trees weren't moving. I thought it was better done in The Turin Horse, but it was still an issue.

[Robin Davies]

Your second spoilered point has been mentioned by various people (including me), but only obliquely, because it's a spoiler. And beyond making the observation you made, there's not really much to say about it!

It is also a feature in Satantango, in that scene in the second episode where Irimias and Petrina walk to the police station. It was my son who pointed out to me that the trees weren't moving. I thought it was better done in The Turin Horse, but it was still an issue.

I find it more of a problem in The Turin Horse because it's not just in one scene but repeated again and again.

[warren oates]

Idk, I see Zot!'s point and agree with it a little. In this day and age, even meditative filmmakers like Sokurov don't shy away from tasteful VFX when they are necessary to enhance or augment an image. On the other hand, if the weirdness of Tarr's entire world in The Turn Horse and the total elemental immersion in it hasn't sold you on the wind, then nothing's going to. It's like those poor man's rain machines in the foreground shots of Tarkovsky films. The fact that you can sort of see it's not raining further out either adds to the strange and unique texture of the images or you forgive it because that's what they had to work with and every other element in the sound and image still convinces you utterly of reality of that drizzly atmosphere. The last time I watched Tarkovsky's Solaris I found myself a day or so later checking out the commentary on Fincher's The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo, where he was talking about wrangling every rain machine in Sweden for a single 10-second wide shot of Daniel Craig crossing a city street. I saw all that rain, sure, but I didn't feel it the way I felt Tarkovsky's rain.

[j99]

I have been desperate to see this for about a year now, and after finally getting the bluray I'm disappointed. Unless I'm missing something, it felt like I watched a couple of hours of nothing. I just couldn't get into at all. I like the Nietzsche premise which inspired the film, and find it more interesting than the film itself. Perhaps I ought to go through the reviews which are linked above to enhance my understanding which is pretty much at zero at the moment. I'll give it another go, but I wasn't too impressed with his previous film The Man From London either. Maybe my interest with Tarr begins and ends with Werckmeister Harmonies, which is one of my favourite films of all time. The other four films I've seen of his, including Satantango, haven't come close to the standard of "Harmonies".

[repeat]

Maybe my interest with Tarr begins and ends with Werckmeister Harmonies

It doesn't sound unreasonable, as Werckmeister is in many ways an outlier among his post-1985 oeuvre; I know people who like Tarr in general but dislike that film, and I understand that it can strike some people as slightly heavy-handed and melodramatic even (while others with different temperaments might love it for the same reasons).