“Bunny” was a little surreal, but altogether, an interesting little film. The montage did an interesting job of portraying parts of the story, initially very slow to demonstrate a sort of daily tedium. However, as it rose in aggression, the shots became spaced tightly together to give a feeling of first anger, then fear. The long, slow scenes brought it down again, slowing the mood to a pleasant calm. The most obvious religious theme is that with the oven, the mysterium and tremendum. It certainly had both in spades, manipulating the fear and tension. The oven became a monstrous and unnatural figure, first used as a tool of death when the rabbit destroyed the bug and then channeled into a tool of transcendence. The parallels to suicide exist, but honestly, I think it was more to build tension, to accentuate the tremendum with an icon of death. The other meaning, as discussed in class, of the oven as a tool of transformation won out, giving it a more pleasant message with the bunny joining her dead husband at the end.
Questions: was it more likely the oven was a dream or a vision? What would it mean if it was one or the other? Could the bug be associated with other classical spiritual messengers, like Gabriel or spirit guides?
“Northfork” had a much different approach to montage and mis-en-scene, the former intricate while the latter is sort of simple. The buffalo were … well … buffalo. They gave a certain feel for the natural and the sacred, as they themselves are natural. However, the situation they’re put in also represents the current state of the sacred in regards to the events of the movie. The scene, at least from where I sit, with more rich symbolism and demonstration of using montage to create meaning was that of the church spliced with the characters driving away. The shots themselves, looking back, were uninteresting. However, the way they were put together creates a connection between the natural, although unsettling, view given from the church with no back and the migration of the doomed town. It highlights the interaction of the sacred and profane, although it does this in a way that sort of beats the audience over the head with it. The preacher’s sermon, given the backdrop of the mountain, provides a clear sacred order in place, one that is of a greater understanding and peace. The situation of the movie, however, is contrasted as the profane order by the bleak shots of those fleeing. In them, the audience sees a darkness to the nature of the evacuation, that it is of something completely of this world and absent larger meaning. The shots merged with each other pull these together, giving the viewers a sense of this in a very direct fashion. I’m not sure how I felt about it, a little put off by the blunt nature of it, but I certainly can’t deny that it did it well.
Questions: could the mountain behind the church be establishing nature as sacred? Does the traveling, which must be done in cars, have anything to do with portraying the profane? What are some things the sick boy could represent?
“Paris, Texas” was my favorite by far. I loved the approach, I loved the imagery, and the pervasive bleakness was designed with a clear purpose. The shots of the main character traveling across the desert certainly do a good job of establishing tremendum by showing the vast emptiness of nature around him. This is, for good reason, a frightening thing for most. However, as it progresses, this takes itself to all things. The background when he stands outside appears huge and intimidating, rarely peaceful, to show his separation from calm. He constantly travels outside along train tracks, phone lines, and roads while in the city, he does the same thing with the vastness of the highway behind him rather than mountains. His dissonance to all things remains even after his trials and finding his wife, apparently finding little to no solace. Maybe this changes throughout the film, though in those parts, he seems pretty struck down. In this, there is a hint of the sacred and the profane, but there is an even larger point of the transcendent as wholly other. The main character is constantly cut off, constantly separated from anything that seems bigger or wiser than an empty wilderness with nothing for him or an urban jungle absent meaning. I thought it was very engaging, especially his interaction with his wife in which he seems both mentally and physically distanced from her by his absence and the glass.
Questions: does the protagonist ever find belonging in the movie? Could his disconnect with his wife hint at any other kind of a disconnect?
I honestly don’t even know where to being with “The Wall.” Yes, it’s rich with symbolism, but it’s also just insane and constantly mutating and disturbing. So, off the bat, mysterium and tremendum are well-established. The beginning is fraught with surreal, violent imagery, such as the steel plane-bird that cuts the earth and turns into a building, the skeleton soldiers, and the bloodied cross. It moves on with, more or less, terrifying and dark imagery and no hints of the positive. The constant darkness only serves to make the movie more surreal, such as the flowers that are then lovers, that are then fighting beasts. That, however, is more akin to the faceless children being ground into meat or the schoolchildren rebelling against their institute in an act of total destruction. The both of these things show an absence of the transcendent and the prevalence of the profane. Through these things that are happening, all sacred is ripped asunder and anything of greater meaning is long gone. While the whole thing is like shoving your mind through a rainbow blender, the theme of disconnect is shown eloquently in the transitions and how they bond to one another. The shifts of one thing to another are pretty seamless, even when, like in the first-mentioned scene, they all take place staggered over each other. The non-cartoon scenes like those with both sets of children use a similar strategy to “Bunny” in that they become more frantic and chaotic as they go on. Odd as it was, it was fairly well-done and I might actually go see the whole thing just to see where it goes.
Questions: WHAT?! Also, is there any hope of the transcendent or holy in this symbolism? What is the exact function of the judge being a pair of legs and a crotch? Is the chaos meant to be superior to stifling order, or just another negative alternative?
“Cabeza de Vaca” had some interesting moments. The scene where they were running and being attacked while their priest walks away with the cross has quite a bit of symbolism. The foreign sacred order is persistent while the rest is torn away and destroyed or captured. The captivity of the main character in this leads to his attempt to escape leads to his understanding of his sacred order. In resisting this, he is lead to the circle with the lizard, showing how he only draws himself deeper as he now has no choice. The cuts between the ceremony with the lizard and his fleeing connects his panic to the sacred layer underneath. The following that focuses on his face specifically represent in this between state, as well as the panic he feels. In regards to order, he has been removed from the profane by his capture, but not yet a part of the sacred. The shots focusing on him specifically are just as relevant when he does come to understand the sacred during the healing scene. His fascination and fixation on the task at hand show that he is coming to know what is going on. The most clear example of this separation, however, is in his discussion with his superior officer, who is set on razing the area in question to continue expanding. I think a lot was lost in seeing only a few scenes, probably a lot more of the complexities between the metaphors. Either way, it gets the point across clear enough as well as having a clearly-established profane and sacred order, not unlike “Apocalypse Now.”
Questions: is there any event or shift that signals the protagonist’s movement into the sacred? Does his reluctance have any greater purpose or is it just resisting change? Does the conquistador at the end that the protagonist argues with have any positive motivations or is he corrupt? Is there any symbolism for the protagonist’s hair? (not a joke, I believe it changes throughout the film, but stays constant once he becomes ingrained in the native culture)
No comments:
Post a Comment