CINEMA THINKS – Cinema and the Philosophical Project of Alain Badiou.

France - "Vous aurez le dernier mot" - TV Set“There is something interesting in cinema because we cannot reduce it to a conceptual definition.”

The above quote from renowned contemporary philosopher Alain Badiou opens up a world of theoretical enquiry into cinema as an art form and where it might be heading. However, as always, targeting the specifics of this interesting ‘something’ is not an easy task. This article will break down Badiou’s thought on cinema and hopefully open a way for more exciting thought on the cinema and appreciation of such art works.

We begin by asking the interminable question “What is Cinema?” It is an everlasting question because there is no definite answer. If cinema is an art form, then why can’t it be conceptually defined like all other arts? If not defined, then what is the special ingredient? For example, poetry is an attempt to say what cannot be said, theatre is a battle to form an external relationship between human beings and an audience, and painting aims to create the visible from the invisible – these are the fundamental ideas that promote and invoke these arts. There will always be further ideas on such a quest, but it is clear that cinema holds no such distinction. I always like to argue that cinema is a collective of all these ideas and that’s what makes its individuality eternal, it is never shaped by a definition, and therefore there can be a positive infinity in cinema production.

However, as Badiou makes clear from my previous assumption, cinema itself is a very complex question and therefore cinema as an art must also be a very complex question. It is rather simple really: cinema is complex, so hence anything we wish to attribute to cinema (philosophy, art, psychology, archaeology etc.) will also become complex. A philosophy of the cinema is a complex idea; we can never really know what cinema is. Badiou even attempts to postulate cinema as the “history of complexification of itself.” These layers inherent to cinema form a unique relationship whereby the spectator falls under the spell, or inside the cinema according to Badiou, but without knowing its real signification. Cinema is essential in the collective existence of today’s world and yet it continues to be something that we have no firm notion off – certainly from a theoretical standpoint, but arguably by way of practice also. Is this not a very dangerous idea?

Badiou_Cinema

 

Whenever we are considering the thing of something, or the what is, we need to retrace our passage back to some custom of historical antiquity. Plato is a good denominator to begin with, especially for cinema. With philosophy we are on a search for truth in life, or a true life, something that is pure and in accordance with our entire make up. How does cinema impact this quest? Can cinema be true to life? These questions are inscribed into every film, and it often comes back down to the spectator’s ability to suspend their disbelief: to give themselves whole-heartedly over to the sequence of images and sounds on the screen. If they can do this then the images they witness are true, at least true to themselves. Even so, this it too general, we need to look beyond the spectator and take the films at face value. What makes a good film? How can we identify good film with art and philosophy?

If Plato were alive today, he would probably be feeling very ill. We cannot escape images today. The famous cave allegory was a false reality for Plato, but it is the founding movement of cinema: moving shadows cast themselves across the walls of the cave once backlit from a great beam of light. This was a conviction of truth: the composition is an illusion! Illusions cannot be so! Here is the answer: cinema does not claim to be such a false reality, cinema knows very well that it paints a grand composition of illusion, and its images are no substitute for contamination, they are didactic images that speak off new formations and new bonds of knowledge! In other words, cinema is an answer for finding the truth in irreality; cinema knows that it lies, but it is a lie of edification.

Cinema is alive and speaking to us. Cinema has possibility, it is an art of possibility perhaps, and this is why it must have a relationship to philosophy and vice versa. Because cinema is so alive, it is constantly in battle, a fight between art and non-art. It is here that Badiou can draw out his belief that “cinema thinks”. By way of this vision in which a contemporary world battles with art through film, we are able to distinguish the good films from the bad. If, permitting to Hegel also, art is something of the past and cinema takes on a contemporaneous position as the ‘impure art’, then through constructing a successful conflict of images one has created a good film. This conflict is within the images themselves as well as the audience because the images require contemplation and are often ‘vulgar’ or disruptive. Cinema is therefore not a peaceful art and furthermore, this aforementioned fight between art and non-art is allowed to erupt between its fences. We can then resolve, in line with Badiou’s claims, that the more impure the artwork/the film, the greater the present battle is within the image itself and the better the film!

MelancholiaWhile this is all very metaphysical and might seem dismissible to most audiences, Badiou has targeted the underlying causes for our connection with the image from a strong philosophical standpoint. The point of most significant is this totalisation of cinema: cinema as the non-essential but all-permitting feature of new possibilities and limitlessness. Cinema creates new evaluations and new participations in dialectics. For example, great music can be given a new education in films. Lars Von Trier’s Melancholia features music from the prelude of Wagner’s Tristan und Isolde. The music is played at different points throughout the film and at each instance is inscribing new meanings onto the image. There is battle with the image and the music is forced to engage in new directions. The range of possibility is astonishing. It is here that cinema takes a form of judgment on all the other arts.

Badiou is telling us to “go to the cave.” We must approach cinema as a means and become involved in the democratic dialectics of our modern education. If none of this speaks to your way of thinking, then you must focus on the idea of possibility: the search for possibility. Cinema makes the search possible.

 

Author: Charlie Bury

 

You can watch the full video that inspired this thought below.

Spy – Figeish

spyDirector: Paul Feig
Title: Spy
Production: Chernin Entertainment, Feigco Entertainment (US)

Paul Feig certainly deserves respect for his inflated and witty methods of giving the audience plenty of punch, but so much is attempted that I felt I was hardly watching a movie and something more like an explosive stand up routine. It is undeniably funny and it will be received with great pleasure from a wild flock of summer entertainment enthusiasts. The laughs collect in different measures, occasionally the self-aware slapstick will get in the way of the more developed commentaries in pursuit of social puns, and the popular culture in particular is rewarded with heavy dosage. Fits of laughter spewed out across the auditorium make oneself hard of hearing for the actual rebound, but the wicked gasps in response to such images as kitchen knifes cleanly splicing there way through flesh were sufficient enough to boost my audience predilections.

Susan Cooper is everything that a CIA agent shouldn’t be: I don’t need to spell out the long list of adjectives. Therefore, you quickly sense that the film’s objective will be to turn this around and make her kick some serious butt out in the field, instead of being cooped up behind her staunched desk with Miranda Hart. I say Miranda Hart because she sticks out like a snapping branch in the wind, though unfortunately the only miscast in what is a very attributable supporting cast. Jason Statham is uproarious as the trouper agent Rick who is an unconditional fool to believe in his dexterities, but has the warm heart underneath it all to compensate; the soul of a child even. I must note that Carlos Ponce’s character treats Italians so unfavourably and with such misunderstanding that I found it painful to watch: yes, men can lust woman, but seriously?

Thankfully, there are a few surprises along the way, but this is largely due in part to the revelations not making a whole lot of sense. When you whittle it down, the infiltrated domain of this arms dealer has no reason to exist other than to serve the surface proceedings. There is no explanation or commentary here on the severity of such dealings, but no harm done as the film is well to not be interested in such matters. Just try and imagine a logical way to reach a storyline where you become the guardian to your very own rogue. No spoilers here.

There is obvious reason why espionage outings are often given the thriller bonus rather than comedy: I doubt a member of the international intelligence goes about their jobs making a fool of themselves. Of course, this is thoroughly naïve of me, a comedy can come and go as it pleases, particularly one constructed in a spoof factory. Jonny English was novel and every attempt since has been misguided, for starters, why are these films made? An individual being totally inept at their jobs does not enrich comedy; rather it is in the working of normality where we can find the most enriching moments of hilarity. I cannot help in taking a critical standpoint to these films. Comedy is by nature a particular activity that is found in unique sensibilities (it is the delivery of a comedian that lures us), but films like Spy seek to codify conventions and displace the charm that should be associated with comedy.

spy_weaponsTo fully suspend any disbelief with this breed of film requires your inner gremlin to go through some form of cathartic release. It means embracing the consistent malfunction of life on the screen and converting it into hollow hedonisms. In other words, aim to let the thought “this is just ridiculous” rest in the back of your mind and bury it there for the duration of a spectacle that successfully completes a full-scale turnaround of glees. The film does have intelligence and it could easily be ten times worse, but can’t anything be so?

Now that the honest niggles are out of the way, I can say that Spy was a good film. 3/5

François Ozon continues to pump life into his work – ‘The New Girlfriend’ is full of that special ingredient.

The_New_GirlfriendDirector: François Ozon
Original Title: Une nouvelle amie
Country of Production: France

There is no definition of sexuality than can be exposed as essentially true. There is always the taste of new beginnings alongside the creation of something novel in François Ozon’s take on life. The New Girlfriend can appear as courageously outlandish at first sight, but with any thoughtfulness, it is really a stadium of delicacies, complications and desires flung about in a representative fashion that gives one a resounding connection. Your thoughts bounce along a treacherous path spread out by Ozon’s ability to mix fully puffed amusement with gasps of the wonderfully curious. Temptation must be Ozon’s mantra.

An opening sequence assigning the breadth and charm of friendship spreads like butter across the screen as two girls grow from seven years of age to wedded ladies of the household. There time together does not wither until the moment death comes knocking on Laura’s door. This comes as no surprise, but might just break the record for your quickest teardrop in movie history. Laura’s best friend Claire (Anaïs Demoustier) will never forget this woman and serve the pledging duty of casting a watchful eye over the now late husband of Laura and her unforgettable baby boy. Touching scenes are squeezed in of father and son learning to walk amid the occasional close-up featuring the infant complex – the face of widespread joy and innocence, yet so quickly redirected by desperate cries. I’ve always wondered what the core cause for such fraught tears in babies is – it is surely driven by angst, a cry of why oh why have you bought me into such incomprehensible existence!

The film is not all bread and butter, as unmistakably surprising discoveries must be made. Late husband David (Romain Duris) has a secret of his own that once unclothed he is more than happy to share with dear Claire, and consequently lead a course between unchartered territories. Demoustier is utterly desirable in her ability to balance an act of lust and empathy. Her eyes tell conflict as she moves from a rather repressed individual to something far deeper. The act is unparalleled in the film, but Demoustier consumes enough space to focus most of one’s attention. One becomes wholly dependent on her phenomenal performance. Duris has a sure fire way of achieving what he needs and is ever so close to reaching an equal counterpoint, though he isn’t given the easiest of circumstances, to say the least.

Ozon is in full command here, I imagine him to be a toxic romantic with a passion for the psychologically displaced. He puts the audience in such unexpected situations during instances like stringing close-ups of make up being applied to a face only to reveal the same features attached to a body placed in a tidy coffin. He is not telling the simple stories that one may at first believe, but instead there are always openings where small wounds need attending. To my dismay, a final act burnout seems required to add some punch to the film, but it only seeks to hinder the elegance of that which has come before. Nevertheless, the entire experience should considerably outweigh any particular event or device, though not to be confused with the specific rendering of a powerful image. The mind will always hold onto something novel or unfamiliar. Novel is positively a blend of François Ozon.

4.5/5

Kelly Reichardt meets Richard Linklater in Harry Macqueen’s blessed debut ‘Hinterland’

Hinterland film stillDirector: Harry Macqueen
Original Title: Hinterland
Country of Production: United Kingdom

British ultra-low budget independent film is firmly back on the map with a stroke of the near impossible landing itself on big screens across the country. The stroke of this impossibility is achieving what Harry Macqueen has just shown by producing, writing, directing and starring in his own work: a mature and heart capturing piece of drama. Forgetting the thorny logistics of low-budget film production and inevitable few blemishes that struggle to hide themselves, the film stands alone as an incredibly well thought out and paced exploration of friendship and undiscovered love. It is lyrical and enchanting every step of the way. The few imperfections only serve to bolster the quality of this tender portrait that inherently blurs the cinematic boundaries and makes for a truly singular indie outing.

Harvey (Harry Macqueen) picks up his old friend Lola (Lori Campbell) from a pals burnt out apartment and sets forth on a road trip in the old reg. handed down from the parents. Cornwall is the destination and warm Dartmoor ponies, cliff-top panoramas, and melodies around the fire are just some of the delights that await the couple. However, a couple they are not to be even if such thoughts riddle under the surface. What plays out is a wonderful exposition of a beautiful friendship occurring between two members of the opposite sex.

Harvey and Lola enjoy each others company and are visibly in need of one another, but their agendas, and means of searching for something in life that seems to be missing, emerge as slightly quailed. The truth might be that even if they were so fortunate as to open their arms in love, the complications of being in your twenties and finding one’s grounding in a strange world would quickly offset things. It creates a complex of existential angst that can be felt in the running commentary of what feels like a critique of the new generation, the ennui and complexity that we have been left to face. However, such ideas are never forced in the film and given ample space for reflection.

Nostalgia beams from nearly every interaction in this film. In particular, Harvey looks to spend a great deal of time in a state of intense reflection. Scenes will fall off and be carried in a different direction by dialogue that arguably is too well intended for its own good. It’s as if we are overhearing a real conversation, yet cinema has a spell of rendering such realism superficial. Drama needs some drama, to speak in too simpler terms. I can’t articulate an answer for this explanation, as it would need to involve a dissertation on the art of the actor in some way or another! As evidence from this writing, one can take this film any which way. The beauty of such effortless moments is that there can be no definite answer to what a character believes or is thinking at any given time. We don’t all possess the skillset of a wizard like Darren Brown. In a film like Hinterland, you decide how to imagine.

 4/5

 

An assortment of atypical Cannes Reviews – from a sorry existence (1) to sheer brilliance (5)

grand_theatre_lumiere

Find out more about each of these films by clicking through the title link to IMDB.

Spooks: The Greater Good (UK)
Kit Harington in SpooksTerrible and terrible where it matters most: the script and casting. I won’t write anymore other than this: the film deserves a star for credible action sequences and technical ability. I apologise for this inconvenience. 1/5

Amnesia (Switzerland/France)

amnesiaYou might just experience elements of amnesia watching this film. I’ve forgotten most of it and it was dealt like a blank deck of cards. Two interesting characters of different ages and backgrounds gently form a bond that will never become the reality that is perhaps so desired. An interesting starting point for a tale, but extremely underplayed here. The capital crime of drama scores the highest marks: passivity. One could potentially see the complete opposite: the films greatest feature is that real life can often be this boring! 1.5 /5

The Sea of Trees (US)

the_sea_of_treesThere is the jungle and the home. The events in the jungle feel contrived and painfully engineered, while the motionless flashbacks to the old procedures of a failing marriage actually carry some weight. Naomi Watts and Matthew McConaughey react together with a dynamic that is strikingly consistent with a floundering relationship. They are both great actors who can always go the distance in expressing a tortured soul, so while there is nothing we haven’t seen before, there is at least something special between them.

The film does not create a lasting impression. Given the plotline it should be a devastating film and under such circumstances it should linger. Why not? There is no secret ingredient that can answer this; it must surely be a whole culmination of factors. Though, in particular, the crosscutting to home and back didn’t have any effect for me, and the suicidal colleague of McConaughey was a tricky plea along with McConaughey himself relinquishing his prerequisite with death in order to take up an action adventure of sorts. Furthermore, the music melted over the top of the images like some ghastly peroxide drawing attention to it. It was not poetic even in its desperation to appear so and finally we can just say it’s all a bit messy. 2/5

A Perfect Day (Spain/Mexico)

the_perfect_dayA perfect day spent searching for rope in an armed conflict zone with the hopes of returning a humongous dead body from a deep well leads to no avail. This remains true throughout the course of the film, and whilst all rather a bit tedious, there are more than a few laugh out louds to be had, namely from the caricatures of Tim Robbins and Benicio del Toro. Robbins is wonderfully strong as a pitiful misfit, but stunning Olga Kurylenko is used simply as a means to be stunning and as cause for a little extra controversy between the groups. Though in most cases, the range of performance is significantly left unstirred.

A few poignant moments highlight the treachery and heartache of warfare, of which involve the caught-up adventures of a local boy showcasing his innocence. Although, still there is little to really focus us on these events and no real purpose is served other than the few laughs previously mentioned. The actors are enough to keep one engaged and the panoramas that encompass them duly create a nice spot of photography. 2/5

Diary of a Chambermaid (France)

diary-of-a-chambermaidLéa Seydoux is always remarkable and she is no less wonderful here, but it arrives amidst the unfortunately shambolic retelling of the enchanting Buñuel/Renoir classics. Célestine, the conniving servant, is irrational and lets her emotions spark the narrative in different directions, yet thankfully we are given the sufficient insight to understand the intentions behind such desperate actions; a tribute to Seydoux’s performance that does offer an enjoyable viewing experience. However, the situation of this retelling ultimately had it doomed from the beginning, it is near impossible to be unbiased considering what has come before. The design and locations are rich and fanciful and the film certainly has an allure, a voyeurism, and elements of intrigue, but nothing groundbreaking for French cinema. 2/5

Raging Rose (France/Poland)

raging-rose-crache-coeurThe opening sequence had me sold: thought-provoking work and a very dependable lead performance. However, the film quickly banishes a clear direction and tries to achieve too much with its interaction, yet this is not necessarily a fault and is made up for by an interesting take on naturalism and complimentary achievements in cinematic gallantry. A few instances of nonsensical character developments and other such flaws, but perhaps they are element to the bubbling rage and irregularity of being a teenager. Fundamentally interesting if anything else. 2.5/5

Sicario (US)

EmilyBluntSicarioThe film has its powerful moments from the extreme veracity and horrors of the drug trade to the subtler and more poignant performance from Emily Blunt, but it is steadily lacking in any resolute plot development or regular reason of events. To the films merit, it places us on the side of Blunt where we are forced to make sense of the bravado and corruption that make up the characters of Josh Brolin and Benicio del Toro. We are constantly made to feel fear and anything deeper than this is somehow left behind. Blunt’s fear can feel artificial at times and perhaps it is due to living amidst and acting out too much fear!

The visuals lensed by Roger Deakins also carry the film and the layers of sequencing and viewpoints that make up the action are at times staggering. However, these scenes of car squads pursuing through Mexican towns for half an hour or so with their almighty presence lend to an action, or tension, that is overtly too consistent to have the preferred punch. A captivating fondue of warfare indeed, but missing something, a guess could be a touch of the human spirit: a richer connection between the lines of this interesting conflict. 2.5/5

The Assassin (China)

the-assassin-cannes-film-festivalApart from nodding off for five or ten minutes mid-way through (a merit to the films magic I might argue), The Assassin is a stunning spell of filmmaking that looks back beyond the ancient roots of storytelling and the moving image. Olympia screen one also has some cushy new leather seats, which are considerably appealing after an urgent and clammy stride down the Croisette seconds away from midday sunstroke.

The action is effortless and given a weightless quality that is retained by a strict and somehow expansive form of choreography. The characters feel re-born from 9th century China where the simple natured ways of living by the sword had reached their most potent. This is until our assassin becomes torn between the two worlds postured by family and foe, a conflict of dynasties and moralities. It is an efficient exchange of the cinematic language and one that lets it slowly seep into our growing hearts. The imagery of distant hills in the closing of daylight is also most pleasing (to wake to)! 3/5

The Lobster (UK/Ireland/Greece)

The_LobsterIt is easy to be split into two minds over this film. The better side of you says that this whole game is repulsive, gratuitous and demeaning to the human race as an entirety. Or, the satirist in you will delight at the extraordinary world that Greek auteur Yorgos Lanthimos is somehow able to so credibly postulate. I stand between each for different moments in the film, making for still yet an extraordinary experience. Whatever one says, you will find yourself in fits of rapturous laughter and then in instants of utter silence and contemplation. The foundation of our sense of place, existence and the societies that we have formulated as living human beings is certainly raised from beneath the surface and this might not be such a bad thing.

If we consider the human being as a matter of decadent specie, or in reverse, an extra-terrestrial life form that has just been sponged onto this earth, then we have no reason to take the character’s actions at face value. We can therefore laugh at their incompetence and thank ourselves that we, back in our own nurtured reality, are better off. This is one way to justify the means and the other is to accept a film as a film, and still more precisely a film in which the world (the reality) belongs to Yorgos.

The film kicks off with fiercely witty dialogue and immediately creates a dangerous territory of deadpan humour beyond our wildest imaginations. This continues and eventually falls off to be replaced with more piloting adventure and demonstrative responses from Colin Farrell who excels in such a role. All the performances definitely crack the whip. However, there is little more to the film than these escapades and the crusade of lampooning. The course becomes more and more unsteady, but that said, the taunting and deliciously manipulative last few sequences are to be bestowed upon. 3.5/5

Eisenstein in Guanajuato (Netherlands/Mexico/Finland)

eisenstein-in-guanajuatoThe film most definitely achieves one thing: it is “boxing for the freedom of cinematic expression”. This line uttered by Elmer Bäck, whose prodigious performance has more voltage than a bolt of lightning, is thrown back and forth between uncovering sexuality and the irate eccentricities that trump the traits of a genius. The film pays historical service to highlighting the constraints of a film industry concerned with an American audience and, of course, keeping the costs down! In one illustration, an important meeting with the head of a Hollywood studio is turned into a cat and mouse chase around Sergei’s prized chamber with items of clothing taking on a life of their own.

However, this film does not run away film industry tics and shortcomings. Peter Greenaway makes no exception to focus on exploring a man’s desperate search for identity in a world where the existence of film (in its hundreds of feet) is likely to contain the only meaning to anything. Some moment’s even form a satirical vantage point on the human sentiment, it is reached through the depth of Sergei’s character and is certainly open to many comical and very speaking interpretations. 4/5

Mia madre (Italy)

mia_madreNanni Moretti helms another sincerely honest portrait of late middle-aged overthrow and this time it is a female film director in an ever-brooding tumult over the approaching death of her terminally ill mother who does all the suffering. Despite the exploration of death and the pessimistic outlook on existence, the film is equally bursting with currents of joy and artistic freedom. The expression of John Turturro’s character seeks out nonconformity in the rules that apply to a film set and its rigorous motions. He is an annoyance to the director with all these foibles, but is also a distraction and counterpoint to what the director is really searching for – namely a truth and redemption. Turturro brings moments of real hilarity thanks to the sharp and clever dialogue that he navigates fully charged and by way of particular command.

Reality itself is inevitably put under great scrutiny. The film gestures towards a preferred reality in the medium of filmmaking and is definitely satirical to anyone familiar with the ordeal and magic of the process. Margherita, the director, is able to escape the fears awaiting her at home and launch her imagination elsewhere. However, this other reality constituted by the filmmaker is severely tested by the personal life and develops a very interesting mediation for telling a story with lots of laughs, perception and ideas. A director can smile on a film set and they can also look close to complete bereavement. The ending of this film suggests that it is the place to smile and that there would be little hope otherwise. For Margherita, and dare I say it in more general terms, being a film director gives connotation to an otherwise empty existence. 4.5/5

There are so many great films at Cannes and one can’t possibly schedule them all in or get admission. It is a dream factory of cinema exhibition, but it can seek to irritate, for example in the scheduling of four fantastic films within the same hour. Such is the explosion of filmmaking from around the globe and the riot of 12 days in Cannes to see 1200 movies.

Below are links to my two five star reviews/favourite and most memorable screenings this year.

 LOVE

CHRONIC

Thanks for sticking with the madness and joy!

Chronic is a way of life and death.

ChronicDirector: Michel Franco
Original Title: Chronic
Country of Production: Mexico, France

Endurance and persistence are the principal characteristics of Tim Roth’s chronically depressed character. He is stuck in a motion of caring for those close to death supposedly in order to feel closer to life himself. He breathes their air and consumes it for his own good. It is the paradox of life and death and good lord do we stroke them both.

If there are two more things deeply haunting about this film, it’s the first and last image. An opening sequence precedes the films title card ‘Chronic’, after which appears the skeletal structure of an anorexic lady being washed under the shower by Roth. The shot lingers, frozen to its framing, as is the method of Franco’s use of the camera, and we soon feel the strength of every droplet of water as it carries a piece of life away with it. This will not be the first time that we witness the waking of death; instead every image throughout the film will be stained with its remnants. Ironically, the last image appears as a flash, the paradoxical metaphor is complete and the unexpected becomes a reflection of the expected. In other words, a twist occurs in the way that it should: as a surprise routed in thematic significance.

Chronic_death

 

Trying to articulate an order in which to explain one’s experience viewing this film is difficult to come by. The spectator may experience boredom, anxiety, hunger, anger, weakness, sickness, sadness, and even hopefulness, the latter not being an adjective of focus for Franco yet nevertheless still given its moments. It is a case of going so far in one direction that it becomes impossible not to taste a little of the opposite. As humans we feel great sadness, but the cliché here is that we know we must feel alive to experience such feelings, and because of this sadness we are psychologically able to experience great happiness. It is the sprinkles of salt and pepper mixed into the overwhelming curry.

Roth’s character moves from patient to patient and becomes more and more dependent on those who he cares for, while they equally and more necessarily return the favour. From mental health 101 to old age and cancer, there is no escaping the demise that carries this film and fuels its unbearable nature. This is all attributed to the performances that uncover certain mysteries surrounding death and seek to hide nothing by way of concealment. The true evidence is that which Franco’s camera penetrates: the observation of human emotion, fragility and expiry. The method of filmmaking is restricted, no close-ups, no music that doesn’t appear within the world of the picture (diegetic), no cutting ahead of time, no wild camera tracks, the picture appears quite simply as is. It is a remarkable way to tell stories and makes me wonder why we ever felt the need to tell them differently.

5/5

International sales by Wild Bunch. UK Premiere TBA.