Filmbrain catches up - Part 2

On Primer: With only $7000 and some 16mm film, writer/director Shane Carruth has created an intelligent time-travel film. However, it's perhaps too intelligent. Think of Donnie Darko for a moment. When you first see it, it's a bit confusing, but you really want to piece it all together. It's the kind of film you look forward to seeing again, looking for all the little clues. The problem with Primer is that the story is so convoluted, that after a while you just give up trying to sort it all out. (At least Filmbrain did.) That's not to say it's an impossible task, but it would probably take several viewings to do so. Yet Primer lacks the needed emotional hook, and as a result, the desire to sit through it again just isn't there.

Final thoughts on the New York Film Festival: Filmbrain came across many people who felt that this year's festival was the best in years. While on paper it certainly seemed impressive, many of the films fell short of the mark in Filmbrain's opinion. Woman is the Future of Man was easily Filmbrain's favorite, though admittedly he saw this weeks before the festival began. Though there was only one truly unpleasant experience (Palindromes), Filmbrain too often found himself feeling unsatisfied -- these are directors that clearly can do better! In that regard, Vera Drake was probably the biggest disappointment -- has Mike Leigh gone soft? There was no "wow" film this year, something that hasn't happened in a long time.

One film that left Filmbrain cold was Lodge Kerrigan's Keane. As a fan of both Clean, Shaven and Claire Dolan, Filmbrain had high hopes for this tale of a father who loses his daughter at the Port Authority Bus Terminal. Though Damien Lewis turns in a gripping performance, the film doesn't afford us a moment to seriously reflect on the situation. This is clearly intentional, and does work to some extent, but Filmbrain found himself looking at the film more as an exercise in filmmaking than as a tragic tale. Additionally, Filmbrain knew exactly how the second half of the film was going to play out, and that too took away from the emotional involvement he craved.

Tropical Malady was Filmbrain's third trip with Apichatpong Weerasethakul, and the third time that he felt utterly lost by the film's end. For some unknown reason, Filmbrain just isn't able to "get" his films. They are beautiful to look at (especially this one) and certainly have their share of memorable moments, but they always seem to drift off somewhere beyond Filmbrain's grasp. Though many critics praised Tropical Malady, Filmbrain has yet to come across a review that has anything concrete to say about it, other than pointing out the myth and mystical elements, both of which are obvious. Please feel free to comment below -- Filmbrain really wants to hear from others who have seen the film.

Jia Zhangke's The World is a film that caused a fair amount of discussion, and though there was a pretty even divide between those that liked and disliked it, almost everyone was in agreement that it comes nowhere close to his far superior Platform. Phyrephox's review on Milk Plus pretty much sums up exactly how Filmbrain felt about it -- well worth reading.

Filmbrain's utterly subjective list of the top five NYFF films:

1. Woman is the Future of Man
2. Café Lumière
3. The Big Red One Reconstruction
4. Sideways
5. Saraband

Filmbrain needs a break from the heady stuff for a while. Time to dive into The Critic and SCTV box sets. . .

Comments

[Aaron H.]

I thought that unlike Donnie Darko and the last few Lynch-ings, Primer is actually solveable (I got it in two screenings) and not just the moderately connected tapestry of dadaist moments like those aforementioned films (which I do love, don't get me wrong). As far as a need for emotional attachment, I thought it would have been out of place here--personally, I'd feel more dettached to the story if I was being taught to care for the characters with anything more than an objective curiousity--I think it would have made me even more conscious that I was watching a movie... instead, it was like a riveting little sci-fi novella-on-film (as opposed to an adaptation of a novella). I will agree that it's so convoluted that it isn't a stand-alone thing... you are forced to watch it more than once to fully "get it," which is a bit unfair, but when all the puzzle pieces are actually there on-screen... well, I championed the film, and look forward to Carruth's next. Check out my review, if'n yr interested.

[dave f.]

Nice reviews, guys. I agree with Aaron insofar as an emotional inlet is concerned. The movie's near obsession with retaining objectivity, thereby creating the near unbreakable narrative code, enables it to achieve its sense of the surreal in the face of a strict code of unfettered, unbiased, reportage. I do not claim to have been able to put the movie together, having only seen it once, and despite the scant 77 min. running time, I did find myself drifting at points, almost unwilling to break through the movies almost off-putting sense of distance. Kubrick references abound, but without the intense and vivid portraits of unreliable or mistaken narrators. I do think that out of this years crop of hyped, young indie filmmakers (Napoleon the most obvious), Carruth is the true star who hopefully has greater things ahead of him.

[Matt Winchell]

That's the Bergman's film "Saraband", right? I didn't know that was playing at the NYFF...Cool beans.

[FIlmbrain]

It's not so much the need of being "taught" to care for the characters, but maybe a modicum of back-story might have been in order. Relationships in the film are all so cold, so clinical, that's it's more than a bit off-putting.

Nice review though. But as you say, maybe it's a film only a math-geek can love.

[FIlmbrain]

Yeah -- getting the Bergman film was a real coup for the festival. He rejected requests from many other festivals. (He thought it was simply a TV movie -- nothing more.)

[phyrephox]

I don't think Primer had anything to do about caring about its characters (like 2001, though I think any comparisons between the two are bunk). I found the clinical style to speak for the kind of people these were, rather than a failed way of making me care or be interested.

Thanks for the link rep by the way.

Woman is the Future of Man was my favourite of the festival as well. I have problems with Tropical Malady. I completely value its qualities (it is a highly remarkable film), but I simply could not get into it. I dunno. Maybe I need to see it again. But after having seen Blissfylly Yours, I think I just don't respond well to Weerasethakul's technique, even though I think he is very talented and highly unusual

[FIlmbrain]

Even in 2001, Kubrick gives us some detail about Dave Bowman (was that his name?) -- why else would there be the scene with his parents? The things he does once he wakes up, how he spends his time, etc. -- this give us some grounding of who he is, and there is no surprise at the way in which he reacts to the situations that follow. Even Dr. Floyd -- you could easily write a character sketch of him, but you could you do that for anybody in Primer?

Maybe I shouldn't have expressed it as a need to care about the characters, but the thing is -- techy geeks are people too. Even if you wish to write a screenplay about "those kind of people", there are ways of introducing them as such. Otherwise, all you are left with is the clever idea, which on its own wasn't enough to keep me interested.

[FIlmbrain]

I agree with Aaron H that Carruth is definitely somebody to keep an eye on, and he certainly is doing something more interesting than the typical "indie" director.

[dvd]

I agree with both points about Primer -- that it doens't have an emotional core, or very much of one at least, and also that it might have hurt the movie more if it had one. It's so insanely tight as it it, and allowing the characters to breath (so to speak), while it may have allowed for some brief connectivity on an emotional level, would ultimately hinder the film more than help it. It's sorta old news now, but I've got an interview with Shane Carruth at my site, in which he talks about indie filmmaking and his next projects and other stuff: http://www.road-dog-productions.com/primerinterview.html

[Dave]

I found "Tropical Malady" exciting in how confusing it was, if that makes sense. Because to me it wasnt JUST confusing - the second half echoed the concerns of the first but in an abstract, increasingly bizarre way. It did leave me confused, but also intrigued to see it again and try to further understand. To me the first half's relatively straightforward relationship story continually hinted at the idea that one person is never really understanding what's going on inside the other person's head, and perhaps even what's going on inside himself. And then the second half was an experimental attempt to capture some of those hard-to-define feelings in a way that was more impressionistic than literal. Here's my attempt to write about it - I think I'd need to see it again to be more articulate about it and not as general: http://www.erasingclouds.com/1020apichatpong.html

[FIlmbrain]

Dave -- thanks for the link -- I enjoyed the review.

[J.W.B.]

Woman is the Future of Man was my favourite of the festival as well. I have problems with Tropical Malady. I completely value its qualities (it is a highly remarkable film), but I simply could not get into it. I dunno. Maybe I need to see it again. But after having seen Blissfylly Yours, I think I just don't respond well to Weerasethakul's technique, even though I think he is very talented and highly unusual

Domai