SLOW AWARDS (James' Fault line)

By -


Almost 14 years since the eruption of the "Slow Cinema" controversy, by Nick James (no longer editor in chief since 2019) at Sight&Sound. Do you remember? (as a reminder, see Slow films, easy life, my most viewed and cited article to date)... let's take a look at the situation a decade and a half down the line. The film that sparked James' pouting was Bal / Honey (2010 by Kaplanoglu), which had just won the Golden Bear at the Berlinale. The straw that broke the camel's back. He, and many alike, had enough of this "slow cinema" and its "mannerisms"! 

I tracked back the awards won (top awards in bold) by films that could be considered "slowish" in the 3 major festivals (Cannes, Venice, Berlin), and I made a distinction between true "Contemplative Cinema" (CCC), and the rest. Basicaly, the main difference is using dialogues as a narrative device, or not.

Truly enough, if we consider awards granted before 2010, there is indeed a noticeable streak of "Slowness", especially since 1998-2000, when this trend really boomed (and maybe above all in Cannes). But as you can see, this is only partly due to the prominence of Contemplative Cinema. By this fact, I would like to point out the way this controversy bundled everything "slowish" in the same bag, and fired upon it as a single target. Maybe that is why I felt particularly offended back then. This said, Honey is considered CCC, so James was not hitting on Slow films only, but on quality CCC too. Do you think these awards were given away without purpose?

One question emerging is "Did Honey deserve its Golden Bear or not?" Did any of these listed here?

My personal opinion is yes of course. But I suspect many agree to disagree on this topic... And that's fine. It's only one film, one subjective opinion. However the gripe against "Slow Cinema" was a consensual war on slowness and a complete rejection of everything slowish in festivals, in theatres and even in filmmaking itself. They purported that "Slow Cinema" was a fad, that it was time to go, and good rideance...

I don't see no reason to dump the baby with the bathwater, when you've been treated to, at Venice for instance, a pretty good series of undisputable Golden Lions (#number = rank on the Sight & Sound 2022 top1000) :

  • Still Life (CCC) #809
  • The Return (CCC)
  • Goodbye, Dragon Inn (CCC) #126
  • Vive l’amour (CCC) #582
  • The Circle #986
  • City of Sadness #163
  • Landscape in the Mist #947
And even Deserto Rosso, or Ivan’s Childhood, which were beloved precursors. Same for Cannes (less evident in Berlin). They were voted in by world critics at the Sight & Sound poll, it's not like the profession is hating on festivals as a whole...





Now, let's take a look beyond the fault line generated by Nick James. Did the streak blow out? Did critics stop liking this type of cinema? Did festivals start to boycott slower films? Did filmmakers find new stylistic horizons to make films? Did audience abandon Slow Cinema because of that critical backlash? Did film students and academics give up on making video essays or writing theses on the subject? My answer is always no. (Just see my Library & Video essays pages for the last question asked)

Berlin only gave 1 more Golden Bear after the debacle to Black Coal... but Berlin was never big on Slow Cinema, compared to the other two. So maybe James had an impact on the Berlinale...

Venice rewarded so many slow films since 2010: Golden Lions to Sokurov, Andersson, Diaz; and best directors to Cai Shangjun, Amat Escalante, Roy Andersson (again)! Not to mention the other non-CCC films...

Cannes granted the top Palm to Oncle Boonmee, which triggered a mea culpa from Nick James (see Being Cassandra), and to a couple of "Slow Cinema". Most importantly, the FIPRESCI prizes confirm that critics still enjoy this cinema.

Last but not least, the 2022 Sight & Sound Canon featured not only Jeanne Dielman at #1, but a bunch of other CCC and Slow films in the top1000 :
  • Beau Travail #8
  • Satantango #74 CCC
  • A Brighter Summer Day #77
  • Tropical Malady #92 CCC
  • YiYi #95
  • The Swamp #120
  • The Headless Woman #173
  • Taste of Cherry #183
  • TieXi Qu West of the Tracks #196 CCC
  • Werckmeister Harmonies #209 CCC
  • Happy Together #224
  • Syndromes and a century #250 CCC
  • In Vanda’s Room #292 CCC
  • D’Est #332 CCC
  • Through the Olive Trees #365
  • Millenium Mambo #369
  • Songs from the Second Floor #397 CCC
  • Wendy & Lucy #459 CCC
  • The Wind Will Carry Us #593
  • Spring, Summer, Fall, Winter… and Spring #684 CCC
  • Hunger #690
  • Mother and Son #787 CCC
  • Evolution of a Filipino Family #992 CCC
  • Colossal Youth #993 CCC
  • Silent Light #995 CCC
There is enough evidence here, cumulated with the test of time (14 years), to debunk the "anti-Slow Cinema" controversy.  Just to set the record straight. There are still bad CCC films being made, and it's OK, because like with any other film aesthetics there are good and bad apples... But we can't deny the festival awards are worth their weight in gold and that the Contemplative filmmakers fully deserve them. Contemplative Cinema lives on, alongside its broader sister-entity called "Slow Cinema", even though it is time to treat them separately for the benefit of both sides.

Is "Slow Cinema" too mannerist yet???

Comments

Post a Comment