Unspoken Cinema 2012 banner

Wednesday, October 10, 2007

The story is always a part of the image

In an interview with Bela Tarr (unknown date) :
"STEVE ERICKSON : It seems to me that there are certain sections of SATANTANGO which emphasize the image far more than the story, and vice versa. Do you see a tension between image and narrative?

BELA TARR : I don't think they are detached, because the story is always a part of the image. In my vocabulary, story doesn't mean the same thing it means in American film language. There are human stories, natural stories, all kinds of stories. The question lies in where you put the emphasis on what's most important. There are everyday titbits that are very important. For instance, in DAMNATION, we leave the story and look at a close-up of beer mugs. But for me, that's also an important story. This is what I mean when I say that I'm trying to look at things from a cosmic dimension. If I could describe a film fully by telling you the narrative, I wouldn't want to make the film. It's time that film frees itself from the shackles of linearity. It drives me crazy that everyone thinks film must equal linear narrative."
And in Jonathan Rosenbaum's review of Satantango (Chicago Reader, October
14, 1994, also in Essential Cinema) :

"If great films invent their own rules, reinventing some of the standards of film criticism in the process, Béla Tarr's Satantango surely belongs in their company. (...)
Satantango is a movie calculated to hit you where you live and to change how you think and feel about it. If all your life has been spent in front of television and movie screens, the movie may not register, because this is one of those rare films that address not "the media" but everything the media leave out."

Both Bela Tarr and Rosenbaum spell out right there what separates the "Contemplative Cinema" trend from the traditional way to make movies. They point out that the film is not about a story, that we can't appropriately describe its narration, that the story is in the images, the importance of mundanity at the same level as other characters, that the narration doesn't function like in the traditional media. That's what we are looking in on this blog, and we need to analyze these aspects in particular, not just with Tarr films, but with other C.C. auteurs who seem to agree about this dissident stance.


P.S. Anybody would like to scan through the wealth of reviews and interviews about Tarr's latest film, The Man From London? I haven't seen it yet, so I can't fully appreciate what is said nor figure what really deals with C.C.
I'll try to make a links resource page special for Bela Tarr.

Friday, October 05, 2007

Yvette Biro on Bela Tarr

notes on Yvette Biro's book "Le Temps au Cinéma / Turbulence and Flow" (2007), Chapter 7 : Odysseus.

Atemporal Time

About Satantango (1994)
"Nothing happens, but we feel that everything is determined from above or from away : human distress, petty hatred and suspicion dominate the rituals of fear, lie and vague attempt to escape."
She uses an interesting term : the intertwined fabric of this human "vegetation".
"Everyone is overwhelmed by the weight of an existence drowned in mud and destined to a hopeless wait, as if they were devoured by the village itself. (...) Each gesture takes an infinite time to be accomplished. (...) Tarr's characters are never conscious of their conditions they drag themselves blindly to the next move, then fall down again suddenly and lose themselves in their quagmire."
"Where nothing moves, reign deafness. (...) In fact, only the vegetative daily life and the lancinate desire to run far away exist. Slowness is a mark of a dead ended stillness for such underground existences. (...) Everything seems to have to last eternally, until exhaustion, without any pleasure. Will is not at fault, it's the repressed instincts, the unconscious to be blamed."
"The strength of their destiny lies in fine inescapable fatality : downfall. (...) Long time ago did they quit this ordinary world, living now in a God forsaken no man's land. Even the awareness of a possible ending to all this is helpless, because the Present doesn't exist, only exists the unbearable infinity of existence."
She talks about the metaphor contained in Satantango's opening sequence. Nothing seems to be happening as the camera circles around the cattle, yet menace is palpable, solely underlined by the monotony and silence.

"Tarr's characters live in a prison without walls, in an opened cage sitting in a perfectly uniform space, overwhelmed by the weight of an immobile time. This neverending rain is time itself (homogeneous texture). This pouring weather is not a punishment of Nature, it's as indifferent as vegetation. The location is nowhere and elsewhere. Time is heavy and atemporal.
It's not Hell, because the great suffering is missing. It's only a vegetative life where people get lost, emptied, shrunk and drowned in the void left out by life."

Here I would like to quote a Charles Baudelaire's poem from Les Fleurs du Mal / Flowers of Evil (1857), entitled Spleen (LXXVIII) :
Spleen

Quand le ciel bas et lourd pèse comme un couvercle
Sur l'esprit gémissant en proie aux longs ennuis,
Et que de l'horizon embrassant tout le cercle
Il nous verse un jour noir plus triste que les nuits;

Quand la terre est changée en un cachot humide,
Où l'Espérance, comme une chauve-souris,
S'en va battant les murs de son aile timide
Et se cognant la tête à des plafonds pourris;

Quand la pluie étalant ses immenses traînées
D'une vaste prison imite les barreaux,
Et qu'un peuple muet d'infâmes araignées
Vient tendre ses filets au fond de nos cerveaux,

Des cloches tout à coup sautent avec furie
Et lancent vers le ciel un affreux hurlement,
Ainsi que des esprits errants et sans patrie
Qui se mettent à geindre opiniâtrement.

- Et de longs corbillards, sans tambours ni musique,
Défilent lentement dans mon âme; l'Espoir,
Vaincu, pleure, et l'Angoisse atroce, despotique,
Sur mon crâne incliné plante son drapeau noir.
I wonder if anybody asked Bela Tarr if he has read this poem, which seems to be a perfect encapsulation of his 7h15' long film.

Yvette Biro also mentions that Tarr only uses two lenses, two frame scales, either the extreme close up on faces, and the wide shot, contextualizing the environment and distancing the characters. Both associated with long takes.
"This device allows the elimination of all concrete and realistic descriptions"

"Tarkovsky is solemn, Tarr is the exact opposite : viscerally natural and voluntarily close to matter. (...) Minimalism leads to eternal recommencement, back to the origins, grounded to something concrete, earthly, without direct metaphysical perspective. (...) when conscience dies, there is neither memory nor effort possible. Intention is replaced by a distentio, dilatation and an extension inexorable of time."

About Werckmeister Harmonies (2001)

"Werckmeister Harmonies creates a unique atmosphere, which thus repeated will attain an ever growning degree of intensity through accumulation. the rhythm, although monotonous, produces an impression of crescendo. Time only moves vertically, downward, with an always greater tension."
"The rhythm is constructed based on restraint. Everything has its proper rhythm, nothing can be hurried nor slowed down. When violence or an action stops it out of exhaustion or the consequence of a natural phenomenon."

Bela Tarr about Werckmeister Harmonies :

"To me, making films essentially consists in dealing with time and with space, and to install some human figures in there. (...) I reason based on mathematical coordinates. Something happens on the vertical axis and something on the horizontal axis. Thus, space and time end up intersecting (...) What's important is what is going on with the framework of this defined temporal unity. (...)
It's not real time, even if I want to give this impression. To us, real time doesn't equate to simple reality, one that simply passes by."

Wednesday, October 03, 2007

Béla Tarr by David Bordwell

The recent films of Bela Tarr constitute a referential archetype of what we call here "Contemplative Cinema", for lack of a better terminology (I don't know how to call it anymore), as they embody every aspect of this marginal trend of contemporary art cinema. The characteristics detailed in a previous post are Plotlessness, Slowness, Wordlessness, Alienation.
  • Bela Tarr eschews plot and storytelling, even refuses to answer questions dealing with that matter. He feels strongly about this choice to shift the focus of a film away from the narrative tradition, which is determinant for this "contemplative" generation of filmmakers.
  • Bela Tarr is famous for his monumental long takes, the absence of onscreen action and the slowness of his characters.
  • As far as dialogue, Bela Tarr is one of the most verbal of this trend, according to me), because he likes to give importance, at times, to a long piece of text (usually monologues), while other filmmakers avoid altogether grandiloquent discourse, either recording small talks without any immediate significance to the narration, or keeping their characters silent for the most part (Bartas, Weerasethakul, Alonso, Sokurov, Kitano). Although Tarr's characters are usually at least laconical, the intellectual speech plays an important role. The political theory of the Prince, or the speech about the Werckmeister Harmonies in the eponymous film. The motivational speech of Irimiás or the police interrogatory in Satantango.
  • Alienation is also a major trait of his films, where characters suffer from social isolation and navigate aimlessly in a world where connection is impossible or at least unreliable.
DAVID BORDWELL ON BELA TARR

David Bordwell explains in a recent post, The sarcastic laments of Béla Tarr, various characteristics of Bela Tarr's style that could inform on a more general scope our understanding of what makes "contemplative cinema" different. In particular, he speaks of "Block construction" to define a non-narrative approach to film exposition.
There is no narrative beginning-middle-end structure to the shots, no dramatic cues to drive the plot and no cross-cutting. Thus the action focuses on the hic-et-nunc of a slice of life which only importance lies in the intrinsic mundane activity taking place. A vision of cinema content he calls "Behavioral cinema" (that would be interesting to compare it to what we know of C.C.).

BEHAVIORAL CINEMA & CONVERSATIONAL BLOCKS

"Tarr builds these films out of conversational blocks, punctuated by undramatic routines. The result is that often major plot actions take place offscreen, or rather in between the dialogues. Exposition that other filmmakers would give us up front is long delayed, with bits of information sprinkled through the entire film. (...) Further, by skipping over the most obviously dramatic incidents, Tarr’s storytelling joins that tradition of ellipsis celebrated by André Bazin in his essays on neorealism. No longer does the filmmaker have to show us every link in the causal chain, and no longer are some scenes peaks and others valleys. By deleting the obviously dramatic moments, the filmmaker forces us to concentrate on more mundane preambles and consequences. (...) This block construction yields an unusually objective narration. These films lack voice-overs, subjective flashbacks, dreams, and other tactics of psychological penetration. We have to watch the people from the outside, appraising them by what they say and do. It is a behavioral cinema."
"Tarr refuses as well to use crosscutting, which would show us various characters pursuing their activities at roughly the same time—another strategy that keeps us fastened to one relentlessly unfolding chain of actions and, usually, one character’s range of knowledge. The avoidance of crosscutting will have major structural implications in Sátántangó, which overlaps characters’ individual points of view by replaying certain events and stretches of time."
"Similarly, many long takes in the later films don’t present a beginning-middle-end structure. We simply follow a character walking toward or away from us, pushing into a stretch of time whose end isn’t signalled in any way. This becomes especially clear in those extended long shots in which a character walks away toward the horizon and the camera stays put. Traditionally, that signals an end to the scene, but Tarr holds the image, forcing us to watch the character shrink in the distance, until you think that you’ll be waiting forever. Likewise, the diabolical dance shots of Sátántangó, built on a wheezing accordion melody that seems to loop endlessly, are exhausting because no visual rhetoric, such as a track in or out, signals how and when they might conclude. Early and late, Tarr won’t hold out the promise of a visual climax to the shot, as Angelopoulos does; time need not have a stop."
TRACES OF LEGACY

"As I indicated at the end of Figures Traced in Light, he stands out as a distinctive creator in a contemporary tradition of ensemble staging. Like Tarkovsky, he shifts our attention from human action toward the touch and smells of the physical world. Like Antonioni and Angelopoulos, he employs “dead time” and landscapes to create a palpable sense of duration and distance. Like Sokurov in Whispering Pages (1993), he takes us into an eerie, Dostoevskian realm where characters are cruel, possessed, mesmerized, humiliated, and prey to false prophets. (...) Whether or not Tarr consciously joined a tradition, his practices do link him to several trends. Tarr has rejected the idea, floated by Jonathan, that his early films are indebted to Cassavetes, but there seems little doubt that by 1979, when Family Nest was released, it contributed to the fictional-vérité tradition, regardless of his intent. Likewise, his late films’ reliance on long takes is part of a broader tendency in European cinema after World War II. The neorealists taught us that you could make a film about a character walking through a city (The Bicycle Thieves, Germany Year Zero), and other directors, such as Resnais in the second half of Hiroshima mon Amour, developed this device. With Antonioni, Dwight Macdonald noted, “the talkies became the walkies.” Jancsó took Antonioni further (acknowledging the influence) in the endless striding and circling figures of The Round-Up, Silence and Cry, and The Red and the White. So even if there wasn’t any direct influence, Antonioni and Jancsó paved the way for Tarr; they made such walkathons as Sátántangó and Werckmeister thinkable as legitimate cinema."

I'm wondering about this "tradition of ensemble staging", it seems to suit better Tarr, than other contemplative filmmakers who prefer to isolate a couple of protagonists only. So we can't generalize this trait to the whole trend.
The attention to the corporality/physicality of the world, "dead time" and landscapes are however something we could observe across this trend.
As far as I am concerned, I don't care to figure out who came first, who influenced who, and if there is a legit lineage within this name-dropping. What's interesting here is to comfirm the plausible similitude, be it purely formal, between these auteurs, as to form a coherent set of thinkalike minds. It's obvious they didn't jump on the latest bandwagon or followed the steps of a mentor (except maybe a few exceptions like Gus Van Sant who admits to his influences). But it's interesting to witness several auteurs push toward the same direction at the same time, even without knowing the similar activity of their peers. It's the collective unconscious that is at work there, an expression of our time and space, a reaction to the state of our culture which affects us the same way anywhere in the world at this point.

"Visit any festival today, as Scott mentioned in our panel, and you’ll see plenty of films with long takes and fairly static staging. I criticize this fashion a bit in Figures, but it’s undeniably a major option on today’s menu. It’s even been picked up in contemporary American indies, with Gus Van Sant’s work from Elephant on offering prominent examples. He, of course, has been crucially influenced by Tarr, but Hou, Tsai Ming-liang, Sokurov, and other directors haven’t. We seem to have a case of stylistic convergence, with Tarr choosing to explore the long take at the same time others were doing so."

It's interesting for us that Bordwell acknowledges the existence of a trend in contemporary cinema with some of the auteurs we highlight in Contemplative Cinema (Tarr, HHH, Tsai, Sokurov, Gus Van Sant, and before that their likeminded precursors : Tarkovsky, Antonioni, Jancso, as well as other Hungarian filmmakers I've never heard of) who show a (coincidental) convergence of style (the long take). Personally I believe there is more than just camerawork, and that's what we are trying to demonstrate on this blog.
And the question he suggests is also one we should ask ourselves, about the reason why this convergence took place at this time in cinema history, whether it is a stylistic maturation, a logical continuation/mutation of the preceding movements of Neo-realism and Modernism, or if there is a cultural/political motive to confront the mainstream realm of Image and Spectacle.

"Tarr’s severe parables, grotesque and sarcastic in the manner of Kafka, don’t exude the religiosity we can find in some of this music or filmmaking, but, at least for me, they share the impulse to lament humans’ inability to transcend their brutish ways. “I just think about the quality of human life,” he remarks, “and when I say ‘shit’ I think I’m very close to it.”"

Tarr admits to an assertive misanthropy (which certain critics seem to feel uncomfortable about), or at least to be overtly pessimistic about today's human condition. If it's not man's nature that is responsible, it's the epoch of our society. And this is still a fairly minoritary concern within contemporean cinema. "Contemplative" filmmakers aren't necessarily gloomy or sadistic, but the absence of immediate reward, the hopeless pursuit of happiness, the conscious realisation of human lowest instincts make this perspective a more realistic view of the world than whatever simmering in the fantasy-deluded minds of mainstream screenwriters.

Saturday, September 29, 2007

Afternoon Times (2005/Boonsinsukh)

File 067/Afternoon Times (2005/Tossapol Boonsinsukh/Thailand)
Opening Sequence : The voice of the protagonist, Bo (Pijika Hanzedkarn), is heard without image talking on the phone (pitch black screen). The offscreen conversation carries on over a stationary frontal shot of a wall scattered with photographs of friends, in dim light. We understand that Bo is opening her new cafe soon and invites various long-forgotten acquaintances to the inauguration. The camera pans to reveal Bo through the kitchen door. The long take captures a mundane activity in real time, as she hangs up, looks for the next number, dials again, and repeats her attempt. The mood of the film is set with a simple shot which contains the heart of the drama. Solitude, estrangement, nonchalance and lack of attention.
Bo, in her early twenties, engages in a new life, by starting up her own business. It's the dreaded time when everyone we used to know follow their own path, travel, move abroad, work intensively or found a family. College friends lose touch and begin a solitary life on their own, building a new social network in a new social environment.
Her friends are all there with her on the wall, nostalgic memories, still fresh in her mind, with the frozen smiles and funny faces posed for the camera. But all belongs to a bygone era of carefree entertainment. Now she's alone, desperately seeking for available friends, like a market researcher, to share her joyful pride with. She would like them to launch the word-of-mouth and bring in many customers. Unfortunately the calls we overheard don't seem very successful. She's got more friends on photos than real people in her present life. A sentiment of profound abandonment sinks in, with remarkable restraint, as the shot keeps on running long after the phone calls are over, staring at her walking around in silence.

Afternoon Times is a beautiful little film made by students with the most basic production equipment to the greatest effects. The creativity of a sobre mise-en-scene, the daring transcendence of small moments, the mundane poetry... all make it an adorable, melancholic episode suspended in time. The very prototype of the Contemplative Cinema trend. Like a haunting memory revisited intact, stripped of superfluous details, these characters are caught in a strange whirlpool of redundant events. Repetition and variation.
The careful observation of minimal gestures throughout the day recalls Chantal Akerman's film which was one of the most important pioneer of "Contemplative Cinema" : Jeanne Dielman, 23 Quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles (1976). Likewise emphasis is put on body language of non-speaking people. Stationary shots frame the situations in self-contained tableaux, that render the presence of a "surveillance camera" invisible while bringing attention to the private life happening in front of our voyeur eyes. We can see what people do when nobody is looking at them, when they don't have to play a social role in front of someone else. A perspective also featured in the segments of Hou Hsiao-hsien's Three Times (2005).

A brownish, darker evening light dominated the introductory shot, a feeling of anxiety and despair caused by the anticipation of her café grand opening. Later, a brighter sunny morning light shines on the film, tinted with a metallic blueish hue celebrating its fresh, acid, melancholic, surreal atmosphere. Congratulations to the cinematographer (Nalina Tungkanokvitaya) who does a wonderful job with natural lighting.

A delivery boy brings a baguette every morning. He's the only person Bo becomes familiar with along her redundant routine. Although their contact is strictly professional, regulated by a polite yet reserved, even timid, etiquette. Without a word he hands over the bread, she gives a banknote, he returns the change. A long trained composure. An automatized ceremonial.

The photographic memorization motif, which structures the entire film, will come as an ice-breaker for them. Upon one of his delivery he's asked to take a picture of her with her friends to immortalize the inauguration of the café. I love this type of microcosmic scenes encapsulating unspoken emotions into insignificant acts, which we find aplenty in Miranda July's Me And You And Everyone We Know (2005) for instance. In this world of lonely disconnected individuals, every little task is an opportunity to meet with somebody else's private sphere and hopefully to step in for an instant in their sealed bubble, if the situation is not too awkward of course. Here, the favor to take a group picture for her becomes a tacit connection. The Polaroid camera is used as a proxy device for interpersonal socialization with a total stranger, like with a lighter or a watch in the street. She asks "Can you take a picture for me?", but what she really means is "Hey, take a look at me please!"

This central theme of self-representation, announced in the opening shot, fully expresses the distanciation of human relationship in today's virtualized world. Without the Polaroid they are confused strangers looking at their feet ashamed of themselves. But hidden behind the camera viewfinder he could lay his gaze upon her. Conversely, under the excuse of posing with her friends, she can show off her largest smile without obviously seeming to seduce him. The self-esteem is preserved for both of them.
Even though they are not aware yet of this blooming romance, the film catches there the pre-historic, founding moment of their future bond. She puts up the Polaroid picture on the wall, with the other pictures. But what it stands for is less the friends we can see on the image than the invisible photographer who took it.

After this defining moment, that will only become meaningful to them and the audience later on, the daily routine and the recurring scenes will unfold according to the slow pace of time flowing by. Careful shots of dish washing, window cleaning, housekeeping in silence and solitude. Times of inner ruminations, patient wait and reverie accompanied by the absorbing melody on a diegetic cassette with classical music. A catchy repetitive soundtrack reminiscent of Kikujiro (1999). Meanwhile the short length of this one music track marks the passage of time, as she has to rewind the cassette manually to repeat the play. Another little task indicative of the actual duration of life moments. Another opportunity for him and her to connect through a common taste for this music.

The whole story is articulated in seasonal chapters entitled "Afternoon Times", "Summer", "Rain", "Winter", "Summer later"

In a funny scene, Bo dresses like a tourist, with sunglasses, backpack, camera, and pretends to visit this splendid café for the first time. She contemplates cautiously every little object decorating the place, with a self-satisfied admiration, projecting into this fictional character the ideal customer she'd like to serve if the turnout wasn't so poor. She then unpacks her sleeping bag on the floor and stares at the ceiling. It's nice to remember a similar scene in Me And You And Everyone We Know when the kids wondered what it would be like if the world was upside down.

On a rainy day, he's soaked and she gives him a towel. Is it because the light is darker, because the rain pours outside, because the wet clothes wear out the usual respectful distances, or because of this tender gesture showing care? After so many meetings at regular hours for the bread, they seem to look at eachother with different eyes this time. No word spoken yet, no effusion of sentiments. Just a memorable moment shared intimately, the secret happiness of being together. An awkward silence extended indefinitely, planted face to face, which would normally make anybody uncomfortable. Though none of them seems in a hurry to break this tensed silence. They soon return to their lives without uttering a word.

The cassette jams in a bundle and so begins the time without music.

The next visit, surrealism creeps in for a moment of arrested poetry. Within the uncut course of a long take stretching over 6 minutes, they are mysteriously locked inside when he delivered the bread. The locksmith can't even rescue them because rains is still pouring outside. By a welcomed enchantment they are miraculously stuck together for a while. They resolve to wait, and she offers to cook a meal for him. The strange ways of fate has kept them close together for a longer time than their usual commercial transaction. As oddly as it occurred, the temporary spell is broken when he finished his food and the door now opens naturally. He wondered why the habitual music wasn't playing and promises to bring her a new tape. But he doesn't come back the next day, someone else's delivers bread.

She paints dozens of childish drawings representing a fish, a horse, a camera (again the motif of self-representation), countless rows of dashes... and a delivery boy with a baguette in a bag. She loses appetite. Her business is running down. She has to move out. The walls are covered with copies of the same drawing of the delivery boy, like the identical frames of a film strip, like a dismantled cartoon. The paintings have replaced and covered up the photos on her wall. A new medium of representation illustrates the memories of her second life, leaving the photos behind.

Another uncut long take runs for nearly 15 minutes for the second last scene. In one plan sequence the whole set is packed into boxes, just like if the shooting was over, she clears the borrowed premises, helped by a friend. All drawings are picked up one by one, all pictures, and decorative objects. When he asks why she paints, why she takes pictures, she replies "to kill time", "no particular reason" to futher burry her feelings and regrets...
We realize that life is like a movie production, good times are like afternoon times, they last only a while and then we have to move on and get over them. Memories fit in a little box.


The closing shot, brings back the music in the film, after a long silent shot onboard a taxi, showing a close up of her disillusioned face. Her music, their music, re-appear in non-diegetic form, as if the cassette was playing in her mind, and puts a gentle smile on her face. The film considers the archiving of vain memories, as well as the unconscious, intangible making of important ones. The smallest moments of life we never pay attention to, which slam back in our mind when the loss become more sensible. This is a delicate and touching expression of the construction of our sentimental personality.
(Cross-posted from Screenville)

Saturday, July 28, 2007

Slow Film Festival

Recently on the Film-Philosophy salon (newsletter, subscription required), Alan Fair from the UK suggested a slow film festival which relates pretty well with the topic of our blog :
Hi all,
I wonder sometimes if Sokurov is trying this single shot in revolt against the fragmentation of time and space implicit in what Bordwell has called, if I remember rightly, intensified continuity. Bresson, Tarkovsky, Davies, Sokurov and maybe even Antonioni and Ozu might all be examples of what we might call slow cinema, although I imagine some would argue this point. I was suggestingto some students that we should stage a 'slow film festival' a bit like the Italian 'slow food' movement. They, of course, made the point that no one would turn up. Still it seems to me that this exploration of the cinematic image and the indexical, as mentioned by William, I think, is one that we should champion whenever possible.
peace
A. Fair
IDS

Follow up discussion (I hope it's ok to republish it here) :

  1. Alan,
    I think the idea of a slow film festival is great, in militant revolt against short attention span cinema. It would start with Warhol's Sleep and Empire, go via Wavelength obviously, and there must be lots of other gems. I recall Larry Gottheim's Fogline and films by Peter Hutton, for example.
    It would take in Tarkovsky, especially his 360 degree pan from Stalker, and so on to Sokurov. Actually Russian Ark positively races along beside his Spiritual Voices films. Antonioni would be in if only because he makes (fairly) slow films about people with little to say for themselves. He could have been slower, I sometimes think.
    But not Bresson. No director packs more narrative into his shots. Pickpocket is an 80-minute version of Crime and Punishment which is over 600 pages long, but remains fair and honourable to it.
    Only Bresson could have managed it. Miss one shot from L'Argent and you risk losing the thread of the film. Compare Warhol who felt that you could always turn away from his films and they'd still be there when you turned back.
    When is Manchester going to host this?
    > Tim Cawkwell (Norwich, UK)
  2. Way back, I think in the early 80s, Godard said in a tv interview that the cause for things speeding up was that fundamentally people were afraid of life. Hmmm...
    > Henry M. Taylor
  3. To those interested in "slow films": The Contemporary Arts Center in Cincinnati has devoted a year to an exhibition on "slow films" called "The Long View"
    > Kirk Boyle
  4. Another master of 'slow cinema' and of the use of the sequence shot in particular is Theo Angelopolous. His 4 hour epic The Travelling Players contains only about 80 shots. The title of his 1998 film Eternity and Day was deemed somewhat appropriate by certain critics at the time, unaccustomed as they no doubt were to the typically rather slow pace of Angelopoulous' work...
    > Les Roberts
  5. Slow compared to what? The overexcited unconsciousness of commodity cinema? A pretty pathetic comparison, it seems to me. Slow compared to the passing of the hours? Are surveillance videos slow (e.g., Michael Klier's Der Reise)?
    Clearly, slow/fast are observations about the subject, not the object. The undecideable enigma of time problematizes any such discussion from the beginning, and Bergson, among so many others, nuances the discourse. If we're into dualisms, I prefer open/closed rather than slow/fast.
    I would suggest that Warhol's Eat, Kiss, Sleep, Empire, etc. are not, and cannot be said to be, ontologically slow. Santantango, on the other hand, is very slow indeed if one privileges dominant cinema as the reference. Why do that? Time may or may not exist, but there is always choice. A Slow Film Festival, for what it would say not only about our acculturation but about our attention to experience, would inescapably be an embarrassment.
    > gyoungblood
  6. "Time may or may not exist"
    I don't know if I'd go that far, but 'slowness' needs thinking out. What are we measuring 'over time', as it were -- not distance, but what?
    > Henry Miller
  7. Probably the slowest film I've seen would have been something in a language I didn't really understand with no subtitles.
    > Jun-Dai Bates-Kobashigawa
  8. A film that I find to be a perfect staging of slowness is Satyajit Raj's Jalshagar/Music Room from 1958. Celebrating a specific rasa between stubbornness and fidelity, this work brings about a very special slowness of decay.
    > Julian Rohrhuber
  9. You can't NOT go that far, and of course we are measuring ourselves.
    "A measure measures measuring means." John Cage
    > gyoungblood
  10. Slowness is obviously relative, but one needs to determine the objects of comparison, the elements measured and the means by which to achieve the effect. Cinema's objects are Life's practices, and its basic element is movement. A slowing-down of movement within this filmic context may be achieved in many ways and for different purposes. An Antonioni can present asituation where practice becomes impossible, or at least insignificant, so that time loses its rhythms of action and we achieve an infinite slowness (nothing really moves, but you cant say the image is frozen). A Fellini will present similar slowness, but only to gain astounding energies of acceleration towards some sort of festivity. A Rossellini on the other hand will present a slowness which is determined by its incessant regularity (here rhythm is present, but in such a slow way as to become ambient -"Francis, God's Jester", especially the leper scene). These are only Italian examples.Warhol's "sleep" is a whole other story. There, it is the machinic gaze of the camera which achieves a certain endurance that is nonhuman. There is no slowness since it is lifeless. a sleeping man, a dead camera, both operating. It is not interesting to call this film "slow" relative to mainstream cinema in general (why state the obvious?), but to examine how slowness is achieved relative to the whole of the film itself and its particular links to conventions of film. Now, sleep is usually depicted in transition to something else (the figure awakes..., the figure's dream...) or at least relative to something else (the sleeping figure is undisturbed by the racket outside...), but here it is cut off, shown in-itself. This absolute cut and elongation-of-description should not be measured in terms of slowness, since nothing is being slowed down (its not that the transition from sleep to wakefullness occurs slowly; it never occurs). The dynamics of this machinic typology of practices (sleep, kiss, [gazing at] the empire state building) is one of autonomous frames or categories which never achieve rhythm, and therefore are never "slow" or "fast".
    > Adam Aboulafia
  11. Slowness is not just relative, it's entirely subjective unless you're going to define certain criteria weighted against each other for a specific definition of 'slowness' (e.g., length of takes, amount ofcamera movement, lines of dialogue, etc.). A large part of what makes it subjective is that a conception of slowness depends on weighing the significance of the types of events that you are measuring the rate of.
    Andy Warhol's 'Eat' might be considered very slow by most people, since very little happens that will register in most people's minds as events, but that definition of slowness depends on downplaying the significance of events that most people don't consider important (film grain, facial micromovements, etc.). If you decide to make a slow film festival based on a definition of 'slowness' relating to what most people consider slow, then the first task is to figure out what most people consider slow. One thing that seems to make a big difference is that an otherwise silent scene will appear much faster if appealing music is playing in the background, but that's just an observation on my part.
    Alternatively, it might be more interesting to come up with a few dozen ideas of what might constitute criteria for slowness and show films that represent extremes of those notions of slowness.
    > Jun-Dai
  12. There is one general criterion for the experience of slowness that can be further analyzed and specified experimentally.
    E.g. the experience that an addition of music do 'quick up' a film sequence (there is a consensus on it by film composers, film directors and producers) can be explained by the fact that film music adds processing burden to the existing one offered by the film sequence without music, that it brings an additional information package to that offered
    by the film's diegetic world.
    Now, there is an accumulated filmmakers belief that our experience of the 'pace' of the shot depends on the 'information load' of the scene presented in a shot.
    E.g. if a shot presents a bare landscape with nothing in it to attract specified attention, with nothing worth exploring, it will be experienced as the very long (slow) shot, compared with a shot of the same length that presents crowded city street filled with different types of simultaneous events difficult to grasp in a glance - which can be experienced as very 'fast', even as to 'short' for satisfactory perceptual 'grasp'.
    These experiences with the 'optimal length' of a shot do offer a 'default' criterion for the experience of the 'pace' of a film segment: the comparatively less information load on processing the slower a segment of a film will appear to its perceiver, the greater the information load on processing of a segment the faster it will appear.
    Of course, some 'slow' films by this 'default criterion' can become quite informationally filled up (faster) if the attention is rearranged, specified differently then the 'default' one - that happens, say, in experimental, avant-garde filmmaking and videomaking (like Warhol's Sleep).
    When saying that a criterion is a 'default' one - it means that it is 'automatically' applied if no other criterion is offered of specified. One can think of a number of different criteria that will 'flout' this default one.
    E.g. if we are set to expect quite specific information in particular moment of a film discourse, and some distraction shot of a crowded city street is offered instead, this distraction shot may seem overlong to us because we are delayed in getting the wanted information. Etc.
    > Hrvoje
  13. (in response to #11) Yes, and it very much depends on the individual spectator's involvement with the film in question. And on the venue in which it is seen. I once watched Tarkovsky's Stalker on video, on a smallish tv screen - it was almost unbearably slow. It's meant to be and has to be seen in a cinema, on a large screen.
    Speaking of viewer involvement, Sokurov's 5-hour video Spiritual Voices (1994) is probably one of the most intense film experiences I've ever had. I saw it towards the end of Locarno film festival, exhausted after having watched 40 or 50 films in ten days, and I'd anticipated falling asleep. The very oppositie was the case: I was completely enthralled, almost trance-like, in the mysticism of this wonderful documentary.
    Finally, take Rear Window: not suited for open air cinema, where it will seem remarkably slow. Again, you have to watch it in the cinema, or in a very controlled setting.
    > Henry M. Taylor
  14. (in response to #11) Doesn't this mean precisely that it *is* just relative, ie a certain property measured against another? Unless you're going to go without a definition of 'slowness', which might make choosing films under this criterion an uphill struggle. Dare I introduce the use of narcotics and their effects on perception into this discussion?
    > Henry Miller
  15. (in response to #12) It's a good point that our experience of pace is tied to information load, but there are two points that I see coming out of that:
    1) - What constitutes 'information load' and how heavily different types of information weigh upon us are quite subjective and are determined by things like our shared cultural assumptions, our personal experience, our mood, preoccupations, and attention span of the moment, as well as our level of understanding of the various types of cinematic language that are being used in the film. If information is missing from the film and we have to fill in the gaps, does that increase or decrease the information load? Which produces more information load, color or black-and-white film?
    Low-resolution video or fine-grain 70mm?
    2) - I think 'information load', insofar as it includes things like music, camera motion, edits, plot points, dialogue, etc., can be broken into at least two categories: foreground and background (ormaybe conscious and semi-conscious). In a scene where there is music that I am not really paying attention to, although I may be aware of it, the 'information load' increase from a silent version of the scene is primarily in the background. On the other hand, if I'm parsing dialogue, or trying to puzzle something together in the plot or simply follow a sequence of events, I'm more actively processing the information. In the example I mentioned earlier, if I'm watching a film in a language I don't understand, and I don't have subtitles, much of what is foreground information for most of the film's viewers becomes background and textural for me. On the other hand, if I'm trying to piece together what's going on, I may seize details about the way that the actors are speaking and try to process it consciously in a way that a native audience would not. Most likely, however, I will quickly tire from that task and the entire film will slip into the background for me until something jarring or some odd detail captures my attention. Either way, however, the experience will seem as though it must have been slower than it was for the other viewers.
    I think part of why slowness as we normally think of it is subjective is that so much of our perception of slowness has to do with our level of engagement with a film. If there is appealing music in thebackground of an otherwise silent scene, I will become substantially more engaged with the experience. Likewise if I find the acting to be compelling, and if the cuts don't distract me.
    Another piece of the puzzle for me is that I tend to feel things as being slow when they are new to me. I feel like the first week I spend in a new place goes by much slower than subsequent weeks. My first month at my last job went by very slowly in comparison to the last month there. It's as though my memory were skipping over things that it was already familiar with, perhaps reinforcing the existing memories rather than creating new and distinct ones. I feel the same way when I watch a film the second time, no matter how much I liked it or disliked it. It always go by faster the second time. At individual moments it may still seem as slow or slower, but the overall of the experience of the film _always_ leaves me with the feeling that it went by faster.
    > Jun-Dai
  16. (in response to #13) Not quite what I meant. If you pick certain criteria and a way to weigh them against each other, then it becomes relative (and at that point you have created a specific definition of 'slowness', which may have a lot or a little to do with what most people perceive as slowness). Until then, it's purely subjective, because 'slow' as I normally see it used simply refers to a particular subjective experience of a film (or a collection of them), which may have a lot or a little to do with various qualities of the film itself. Much like 'good', or 'interesting', or 'witty', or 'important', etc. Choosing films under a subjective sense of 'slowness' doesn't have to be an uphill battle. You could simply take a poll, informal or otherwise, and pick those films that are frequently mentioned as being'slow'.On the other hand, trying to pick films under a particular set of criteria does raise the question of how those criteria relate to 'slowness' (and why other criteria have been excluded or given littleweight), and figuring those criteria in a satisfactory way sounds like an uphill battle, because then you have to figure in questions like "does the lack of music make this film a slower one, and if so, how does that weigh against the fact that this other film has lots of music but no dialogue?". Then there's also the question of why you are using the term 'slowness' for those criteria, rather than having 'The Musicless Long-Take and/or No Dialogue Film Festival'.
    And yes, I think narcotics bring in an excellent point. If you are able to amuse yourself during a film, then the experience will seem less slow (though the film may still seem slow when you reflect onit).As a side note, one of my professors once mentioned that when he was struggling with a film because it was slow, he would focus on the technique of the film, thinking about the angle of the light and where that indicates the light sources to be, the framing, etc., all in a conscious way. This worked for him (and sometimes it does for me as well), because as long as he was in an appropriate frame of mind, filmmaking was a fascinating topic to him that could give him something to think about when the content of the film failed to.
    > Jun-Dai
  17. This is just to second Henry's admiration for Spiritual Voices. Not only is it Sokurov's most powerful work, it is surely one of the most intense and transcendent observational/meditative films ever made by anyone. Movies don't get much slower than this, but "slow" doesn't even enter one's mind while watching it. You think instead about presence and the present, about being there, which leads to the miraculous.
    > gyoungblood
  18. Someone said "'slowness' needs thinking out." For a film festival, I'm not sure that it does. I think a whole range of films that may or may not be considered 'slow' should play at said festival - and the spectators can decide which is the 'best' slow film or the 'slowest' film - and participating debaters might use this variety of films to come up with a/several 'theory/ies of slow' - rather than having it determined in advance for them...
    > William Brown
  19. 1) - the problem of slowness etc should also be viewed from a more concrete, industrial level of narrative rhythm. after all, the majority of films are written by writers/teams that are trained according to certain rules of narrative structure, scene length, etc. this ties the speed of gratified curiosity to the ideological base of the industry, as well as the conventionality of certain modes of expression...
    2) - there are also problems between the rhythm of montage and the speed of information/meaning in a conventional sense: watching "last year at marienbad" the actual sequences move extremely fast for the most part, but it seems as though it is moving increeedddddddibbbbbllllly slowly because there is no certainty of information, no sense of narrative progress, not even minor moments of closure (is closure required for the fixation of duration, and thus the analytic impression of speed?)...
    3) - an interesting application of problems raised thus far would be a look at Wong Kar wai's "In the mood for love" and "2046", made at the same time, expressing certain similar issues and even using overlapping characters, yet completely opposite in the conventional sense of speed and slowness just some quick ideas, not incredibly well formulated, but food for thought
    > hunter
  20. Talking about speed, there is this (conceited) notion that films have increasingly become faster, leading Bordwell in his article on 'intensified continuity' to conclude that Alex Proyas' Dark City (1998) is, at 1.8 seconds per shot, the fastest edited film he came across. Sure, editing plays an important part in terms of speed. But the pace of dialogue delivery may be equally important: having recently seen again Cukor's The Women (1939), I couldn't help thinking that this has to be one the fastest movies ever made. One might also consider, in this context, Billy Wilder's One, Two, Three (1961), which also builds on a machine-gun rhythm of dialogue.
    > Henry M. Taylor
  21. (in response to #18) on the other side of town there could be a festival of 'thrillers' along the same lines, with spectators arguing the toss over what is and isn't 'thrilling'...
    > Henry Miller
  22. Hi everyone,
    nice to see so many responses maybe I should think about a conference on the topic. Of course Gene Youngblood is right in pointing out the relation between duree and time, I think most people would see that as a starting point for any discussion of this topic. Nevertheless I still contend that some film makers are deliberately making films in response to the hegemonic form, isn't this part of the debate that produces the dynamic of film history. Angelopolous' 'Ulysses' Gaze' for instance unfolds at a particular pace in order for the viewer to contemplate space in the manner in which the protagonist experiences it, or at least this is how it works for me, similarly the opening of Herzog's 'Heart of Glass' which at one point (paradoxically) I think the actual film is speeded up, begins by insinuating the viewer into the shepherd's vision through the slow forward movement of the camera, and what about new film makers such as Reygadas, aren't all these people trying to induce a sense of the contemplative into the experience of cinema, something, judging by my experiences at local cinemas, that is a radical response to movies such as Die Hard 4.0, not that this type of film doesn't have its pleasures, clearly they do. Anyway, time waits for no one.
    peace
    > Alan Fair (IDS)
  23. Les extremes se touchent? In Wong Kar Wai's strongest film (arguably), the miraculous Chungking Express (1994), there are scenes where extreme acceleration (time-lapse) is combined with extreme slow motion in the same shot. Maybe the cinematic sublime is possible at both ends of the spectrum, the extremely slow as well as the extremely fast?Any suggestions?
    > Henry M. Taylor
  24. not only slow-motion. is variable obturation motor.
    > andre gil mata