It is currently Sun Nov 19, 2017 3:43 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 180 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Sep 14, 2017 12:13 am 

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 2:01 am
It's been a few years since I've seen this but, Beautiful is not the lasting impression I got from this movie - though it is very pretty to look at. If I remember correctly, doesn't the 'hero' of this movie basically stalk his victim until she realizes he is her rapist and they both discover suppressed traumatic memories ?


Top
 Profile  
 

PostPosted: Thu Sep 14, 2017 12:26 am 
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 11:26 pm
I would say that my viewing of it is that it is very much about a central act of rape and a sense of dissociation and dislocation- of place, time, and identity- that emanates from it, and from being forced to just accept it and remain in proximity to the rapist. I think it's an incredible movie in that regard, one that makes one genuinely feel the subjective experience of trauma, much more effective and infinitely more proof against eroticising that kind of horror than something like Irreversible. I was surprised that the criticism of the time, positive and negative, almost never views it as a movie about sexual violence, usually just claiming that it's entirely abstract, which seems like an evasion; it's not as though the idea of the guy who made Hiroshima mon amour making a movie like that is much of a reach.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 14, 2017 12:36 am 

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 2:01 am
matrixschmatrix wrote:
I would say that my viewing of it is that it is very much about a central act of rape and a sense of dissociation and dislocation- of place, time, and identity- that emanates from it, and from being forced to just accept it and remain in proximity to the rapist. I think it's an incredible movie in that regard, one that makes one genuinely feel the subjective experience of trauma, much more effective and infinitely more proof against eroticising that kind of horror than something like Irreversible. I was surprised that the criticism of the time, positive and negative, almost never views it as a movie about sexual violence, usually just claiming that it's entirely abstract, which seems like an evasion; it's not as though the idea of the guy who made Hiroshima mon amour making a movie like that is much of a reach.


Excellent, and well said, exactly how I felt about the film and one of the reasons I remember it being a masterful work of art. Of course it took many viewings and critical essays to go through to the point of exhaustion. Looking forward to seeing it again soon.

Slightly off topic, but, I recently saw Marjorie Prime and there is a scene that looks like it takes place at the LYAM - A film as art exhibit.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 14, 2017 12:16 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: A Midland town spread and darkened into a city
Ovader wrote:
No idea if this was discussed elsewhere and couldn't find any search results. On my Criterion blu-ray of MARIENBAD at precisely the 16:14 minute mark "M" (Sacha Pitoëff) disappears as the camera dollies past his shoulder as illustrated by his full silhouette disappearing against the painting. I didn't see a jump cut unless the editing was so precise but this is something I never noticed before in previous viewings.

EDIT: I do see a slight jump in the editing so excuse my excitement over what may have been a new discovery of the M character.

As you've probably surmised, this isn't a mastering flaw but inherent in the film. In order for "M" to mysteriously appear in both rooms the camera is tracking through, two separate takes were required: the first time the camera tracked along the dolly track, "M" was positioned in the first room; for a separate take of the camera repeating the movement, "M" was positioned in the second room. The two takes were edited together in a hard cut which can be detected by the sudden disappearance of "M"'s shadow. Today, the effect could be achieved seamlessly with a little digital work. Still, the effect is impressive as is, especially since the camera was tracking without computer-aided motion control.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 17, 2017 5:29 am 

Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 7:45 pm
matrixschmatrix wrote:
I would say that my viewing of it is that it is very much about a central act of rape and a sense of dissociation and dislocation- of place, time, and identity- that emanates from it, and from being forced to just accept it and remain in proximity to the rapist. I think it's an incredible movie in that regard, one that makes one genuinely feel the subjective experience of trauma, much more effective and infinitely more proof against eroticising that kind of horror than something like Irreversible. I was surprised that the criticism of the time, positive and negative, almost never views it as a movie about sexual violence, usually just claiming that it's entirely abstract, which seems like an evasion; it's not as though the idea of the guy who made Hiroshima mon amour making a movie like that is much of a reach.

Thank you for articulating so well that which I think I've always known deep down, but somehow rarely thought of so clearly as a way of viewing the film. Seen this way it really gains even more power and goes far past the empty series of pretty pictures it's typically derided as.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 180 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group




This site is not affiliated with The Criterion Collection