a trip to the nyff : Silent Light(directed by Carlos Reygadas)
Our main character, husband and father Johan, is in love with a woman that isn't his wife. the film takes us through subtle moments that tell the story of johan, his wife Ester and his mistress Marianne, along with the larger less plot driven story of their faith and of the community in general. Supposedly the film is a tribue of sorts to Dreyer's Ordet (which I haven't seen) but even with this, I have a hard time with the supposedly spiritual aspects of the film - outside of the personal connection I made to the natural surroundings where the film was set (Reygadas' opening shot is of a sky full of stars, and living in Brooklyn, that is a site I rarely get to appreciate.)
The journey of the characters, the plight Johan faces between desire and faith never quite grabbed me, as even with a somewhat scandalous subject matter (adultery in a small religious village), the film relies on the faces of the characters and not on any revelations in plot (save the last scene). And while I loved looking into the eyes of these people it seemed to me to be more like looking at a long set of paintings and not like watching a story (which isn't necessarily bad, but something to take note of.)
I know many folks who love this unconventional method of storytelling and cherish the idea of dumping the typical 3-act structure most films give us - and instead opt for longer takes and ellipses, letting the audience fill in the blanks. And while films of this sort are usually visually stunning and are memorizing to watch, I do wonder about how much they take the audience into account. 2 hours and 7 minutes (the running time of silent light) is a lot for most people to take, even for folks who like slow films and have the patience to appreciate them. Also, practically speaking, the 3 act structure of cinema hasn't really been around that long when you compare it to storytelling forms in literature or theatre (both of which have been around for quite some time). Has it really been explored all that it can be?
That being said, the cookie cutter way in which most 3-act films, especially American work, are made isn't fair to audiences either and in the end I would rather sit through 1,000 Silent Lights before subjecting myself to most of the fare at the mainstream box office.
It is hard to know where to start with Silent Light, a quiet film that transports you to a very different world through striking visuals and a simple story. Here that story is a classic love triangle set in a not so classic mennonite village in the small Mexican town of Chihuahua.
Our main character, husband and father Johan, is in love with a woman that isn't his wife. the film takes us through subtle moments that tell the story of johan, his wife Ester and his mistress Marianne, along with the larger less plot driven story of their faith and of the community in general. Supposedly the film is a tribue of sorts to Dreyer's Ordet (which I haven't seen) but even with this, I have a hard time with the supposedly spiritual aspects of the film - outside of the personal connection I made to the natural surroundings where the film was set (Reygadas' opening shot is of a sky full of stars, and living in Brooklyn, that is a site I rarely get to appreciate.)
The journey of the characters, the plight Johan faces between desire and faith never quite grabbed me, as even with a somewhat scandalous subject matter (adultery in a small religious village), the film relies on the faces of the characters and not on any revelations in plot (save the last scene). And while I loved looking into the eyes of these people it seemed to me to be more like looking at a long set of paintings and not like watching a story (which isn't necessarily bad, but something to take note of.)
I know many folks who love this unconventional method of storytelling and cherish the idea of dumping the typical 3-act structure most films give us - and instead opt for longer takes and ellipses, letting the audience fill in the blanks. And while films of this sort are usually visually stunning and are memorizing to watch, I do wonder about how much they take the audience into account. 2 hours and 7 minutes (the running time of silent light) is a lot for most people to take, even for folks who like slow films and have the patience to appreciate them. Also, practically speaking, the 3 act structure of cinema hasn't really been around that long when you compare it to storytelling forms in literature or theatre (both of which have been around for quite some time). Has it really been explored all that it can be?That being said, the cookie cutter way in which most 3-act films, especially American work, are made isn't fair to audiences either and in the end I would rather sit through 1,000 Silent Lights before subjecting myself to most of the fare at the mainstream box office.
Labels:
nyff
No comments:
Post a Comment