Runboard.com
You're welcome.
Cinemaseekers.com Message Board - Cinemaseekers Forum THE TRUTH ABOUT CINEMA

CINEMASEEKERS FORUM

This forum is meant to be an extension of the themes and concerns of our website. Please keep the focus on spirituality, philosophy and cinema. Thank you!
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this forum are the sole responsibility of the individual contributors and do not necessarily represent the views of the owners of this website (except in postings by the owners themselves under "cinemaseekers" or "questers".)

runboard.com       Sign up (learn about it) | Sign in (lost password?)

Page:  1  2 

 
MatthewJ Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info



Registered: 10-2003
Posts: 27
Karma: 0 (+0/-0)
Reply | Quote
Re: Peleshian Video Update (link update)


Thanks for saving me the money Cinemaseekers. I had a cynical feeling towards this guy just going by the reviews.

I'm always suspicious of people who overly lift another directors style. Just like the Dardenne (sp?) brothers with Bresson with Rosetta etc. All feels a bit put on and predictable.
I wonder if any suicidal persons saw this film and felt a reason for living afterwards? If so then I take back my comments.
3/13/2004, 6:40 am Link to this post Send Email to MatthewJ   Send PM to MatthewJ
 
questers Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Head Administrator

Registered: 09-2003
Posts: 74
Karma: 0 (+0/-0)
Reply | Quote
Re: Peleshian Video Update (link update)


Yes, you are right. "Rosetta" is another absolutely awful film, which many now put on the level with Bresson's masterpiece "Mouchette". How anyone can be taken in by "Rosetta's" superficial use of Bresson's style (which it actually butchers and mocks in the process!) is simply beyond us. It must be that the comparison between these two films is done on a purely intellectual basis, because one only needs to engage one's intuition in the process of viewing in order to see that "Mouchette" is a subtle, delicate, natural poetry of images and associations, while "Rosetta" is an unbearably coarse and pretentious mess.

3/13/2004, 8:17 am Link to this post Send Email to questers   Send PM to questers
 
Chris Kelvin Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info



Registered: 09-2003
Posts: 80
Karma: 0 (+0/-0)
Reply | Quote
Re: Peleshian Video Update (link update)


Sorry to hear you didn't like Japón.

I went to see Rosetta and they all said it was such a great film. But when I saw it I didn’t like it at all. To see a film on the big screen shot with a shaking camera is not a happy experience. The brothers Dardenne are clearly fans of Bresson and Mouchette is one of their favourite films. So I knew when I saw the film it would be influenced by Mouchette. Afterwards, I was very disappointed that this film was just a reshoot of Bresson’s masterpiece shot with a handheld camera. It ads nothing new. This film is just one and all style. This film just didn’t touch me. Although it’s supposed to be a very raw and depressing film. I have also seen their next film “The Son” (le fils) which I think is better than Rosetta, but it still has flaws. I like their minimalistic cinema and some scenes are very good, but most of it is just boring: it’s just filling up screentime. I think the brothers Dardenne are more interested in cinematic style than what they have to say.

Anyone seen "Humanity" by french filmmaker Bruno Dumont?

Last edited by Chris Kelvin, 3/13/2004, 2:08 pm
3/13/2004, 12:27 pm Link to this post Send Email to Chris Kelvin   Send PM to Chris Kelvin
 
questers Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Head Administrator

Registered: 09-2003
Posts: 74
Karma: 0 (+0/-0)
Reply | Quote
Re: Peleshian Video Update (link update)


People, who advocate the films of Dumont, have stated that they appreciate "sex that isn't sexy" as shown in his films (as if this is some kind of a great accomplishment!) and the films of others of the same ilk [such as "Romance", "Pola X"]. This is just another rationalization to accept films that are really unacceptable, that are quite appalling. The sole intent of these films is to deaden a person so much that they can't feel anything: things like the graphic depiction of a raped child recurring throughout the film [in "Humanity"] - that this can be considered to be art is a travesty! All that is accomplished is the further deadening of the spirit until, finally, it can find nothing wrong with anything. Not only do these films take away the precious time that is needed here for the development of the spirit, but they end up deadening the longing for something greater and nobler - that's the worst crime.
3/15/2004, 10:27 am Link to this post Send Email to questers   Send PM to questers
 
Chris Kelvin Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info



Registered: 09-2003
Posts: 80
Karma: 0 (+0/-0)
Reply | Quote
Re: Peleshian Video Update (link update)


Because I had seen “The Life of Jesus” when I was still a student and which I liked, I wanted to see “Humanity” by Dumont. But before I bought the video I wanted to check out some reviews. Everywhere I looked this film was completely broken down. But still I decided to buy it. And thank god I bought it! I really don’t understand the general views of the people who dislike this film. This film is misinterpretated by the mayority of them. They think it’s about sex, about raping children, about the cop that is guilty of the crime? I really don’t understand these views: people have clearly seen a completely different film. For me “Humanity” is one of the most important films of the past 20 years. This film is a meditation about compassion, cruelty, forgivness and the condition of humanity shown through images. The key to understand the film lies in the images (in every one of them!) This film is so full of information, is so complete in what it has to say that it’s just a masterpiece. Even the policegenre is a big statement. And I’m very sorry to hear that people can’t look further than the sex it portreys which in total takes up maybe 4 minutes of screentime of a total duration of 2 and a half hours. To appreciate a film just because the sex isn’t sexy is dumb. The only shocking image in the film is the dead body of the raped child at the beginning of the film which of course is a metafor for cruelty. When you say “the graphic depiction of a raped child recurring throughout the film” I really don’t understand that because there isn’t any ‘graphic depiction’ of a raped child ‘recurring throughout’ the film! I think the mayor problem with people who don’t like this film is because they don’t understand it, because it communicates on a completely different level. This film doesn’t explain things. Although the only thing a person has to do is watch the film: look at what the characters do and look at the images. The same goes for “Japón”.
Maybe the reason why people reject films like “Humanity” is because people don’t feel comfortable by them because it confronts them?

Chris.
3/15/2004, 1:47 pm Link to this post Send Email to Chris Kelvin   Send PM to Chris Kelvin
 


Add a reply

Page:  1  2 





You are not logged in (login)