(shakes head and sighs heavily)
I’m known to some friends as the guy who likes experimental films, the guy who is willing to watch some strange stuff, the guy who marches to the beat of a different drummer. OK, but that does not mean I like everything I see, including experimental and avant-garde work. I’ve even created some experimental films, leaning towards a milder Dog Star Man approach than something like Vinyl or Wavelength, one film that I’m reconsidering as my impression towards the piece has changed. With this piece, I’m caught off-guard and I’m not sure what exactly to say.
There are a lot of moments where there is nothing on screen. Accompanying the absence are narratives and snippets of conversation. When there is something on the screen, it’s hard to make out exactly what the image is. It’s not like Haxan where everything was shot in the dark but that the briefness of the shot duration does not allow you to comprehend what you saw. Yes, Dog Star Man did this but on multiple visual layers; here, there is only one layer to look at and even then it’s hard to see. The image may be clearer in terms of visuals but the content is more difficult to grasp.
The film is easier to find than any information about the piece. I tried to watch it with an open mind like I do with all films. In this case, I saw it and tried to figure out why it’s included on the list without much luck. If the intent was confusion, then the director was successful. After all, the movie ends with the question that will be asked by others who see it: “What went wrong?”
1001 MYMSBYD selection