A tremendous film.
I was drawn to this film because I heard it won best editing and best actress but never heard about it before. I'm an editor so anything that is acclaimed for editing I'm already partial to.
Let me explain my horror as I watched the first ten minutes of film and found not one cut.
The horror! Best editing? What editing? But I'm no fool, I'm use to your "French Cinema", I'm not going to be the stupid American, so I waited, and watched and then, the most amazing thing happened; I felt dirty. I felt like I was doing something bad, watching, being naughty and that was amazing. The beauty of this film is that you never quite settle into it. You never feel completely comfortable, always swishing in your seat, and you are constantly expecting but only receive the unexpected. Scenes cut abruptly, some pull on longer then you imagine, and throughout the entire length of the film you are continually focused trying to decode what you should be watching.
The beauty of the film is that nothing is really happening. The suspense is amazing, because the moment is so drawn out, and is like watching life unfold, moment by moment, in front of you.
You read this and wonder how this could be engaging. It captivates because it is so real. The performances are amazingly fleshy and alive, the dialogue is pure conversation, sometimes you come in to the middle of a thought, without any spoon-fed narrative to help you, that American audiences are all too used to. The film keeps you thinking and wondering, and around ever turn you expect a body or some flood of blood that never comes.
But then it does, and it happens so unexpectedly that you turn your head in horror. You physically turn your head. In a world that desensitizes you from violence, this film has the opposite effect. It draws you so close to the characters that when something does happen it is more violent then any Tarentino film any day of the week. Tremendous! Now, as for the editing, I have never seen a better use of minimal cuts. It was, by all accounts, the most efficient editing job ever. Not a cut was wasted. There was no grotesque use of montage. And when there was a cut, it was a commandment to be obeyed, it had it's own character, and did what editing is suppose to do, tell the story. Allow me to illustrate, and don't worry, Ill try to speak in loose terms as not to give anything away; There is a scene where we watch a man break down emotionally. He is at his lowest point and you begin to cry with him and his tortured soul. Right at the height of sorrow we cut to a wholly different scene. Its quiet, and there is little movement, however, after you assess the scene you realize that what you watching really displaces the man (in the previous scene)'s anguish. So one moment you feel his pain, and in a blink you are relieved of the burden. It's emotional whiplash. It really is the closest you can get to experience the same type of emotion without living through it. They condense it to a cut, and man, it will blow your mind.
Lastly, I'd like to speak of the camera as character and the mythic structure. Don't roll your eyes, because I think this is the most amazing facet of the film. For a quick overview, the Mythic Structure is based on Joseph Campbell's "Hero of a thousand faces" and states, simply, that all coherent stories told follow the same basic structure, and if you would like to have a good refresher (and you should if you haven't seen this, where you been, under a rock?) go here http://www.mwp.com/pdf/WritersJourney.pdf Now here's At first light I assigned the father to be the hero as he was the main protagonist. But at the completion of the film you realize that he cannot be the hero as he ends tortured and punished. It is only then that you realize that he is the furthest thing from the hero, and is in fact, is the villain.
Allow me to explain.
The film is called Cache (hidden) and that is exactly what they are doing throughout the film. They show you his ordinary world, but as the film progresses you gain insight that the man you think you know is much different from what you are led to believe. So who is the hero then? Well, oddly enough it is the son of Majid the Arab. What? We see him twice in the movie, how can he be a hero if we cant follow his journey? Well we do follow his journey, rather, the effects of it.
So, lets take a closer look. I'll take it apart in the order that Campbell places it, even though (as Campbell suggests can be done) the order is rearranged. Since you cant have comments longer then 1000 words, you can check out the full review at www.proletariatfilm.com or below.
I was drawn to this film because I heard it won best editing and best actress but never heard about it before. I'm an editor so anything that is acclaimed for editing I'm already partial to.
Let me explain my horror as I watched the first ten minutes of film and found not one cut.
The horror! Best editing? What editing? But I'm no fool, I'm use to your "French Cinema", I'm not going to be the stupid American, so I waited, and watched and then, the most amazing thing happened; I felt dirty. I felt like I was doing something bad, watching, being naughty and that was amazing. The beauty of this film is that you never quite settle into it. You never feel completely comfortable, always swishing in your seat, and you are constantly expecting but only receive the unexpected. Scenes cut abruptly, some pull on longer then you imagine, and throughout the entire length of the film you are continually focused trying to decode what you should be watching.
The beauty of the film is that nothing is really happening. The suspense is amazing, because the moment is so drawn out, and is like watching life unfold, moment by moment, in front of you.
You read this and wonder how this could be engaging. It captivates because it is so real. The performances are amazingly fleshy and alive, the dialogue is pure conversation, sometimes you come in to the middle of a thought, without any spoon-fed narrative to help you, that American audiences are all too used to. The film keeps you thinking and wondering, and around ever turn you expect a body or some flood of blood that never comes.
But then it does, and it happens so unexpectedly that you turn your head in horror. You physically turn your head. In a world that desensitizes you from violence, this film has the opposite effect. It draws you so close to the characters that when something does happen it is more violent then any Tarentino film any day of the week. Tremendous! Now, as for the editing, I have never seen a better use of minimal cuts. It was, by all accounts, the most efficient editing job ever. Not a cut was wasted. There was no grotesque use of montage. And when there was a cut, it was a commandment to be obeyed, it had it's own character, and did what editing is suppose to do, tell the story. Allow me to illustrate, and don't worry, Ill try to speak in loose terms as not to give anything away; There is a scene where we watch a man break down emotionally. He is at his lowest point and you begin to cry with him and his tortured soul. Right at the height of sorrow we cut to a wholly different scene. Its quiet, and there is little movement, however, after you assess the scene you realize that what you watching really displaces the man (in the previous scene)'s anguish. So one moment you feel his pain, and in a blink you are relieved of the burden. It's emotional whiplash. It really is the closest you can get to experience the same type of emotion without living through it. They condense it to a cut, and man, it will blow your mind.
Lastly, I'd like to speak of the camera as character and the mythic structure. Don't roll your eyes, because I think this is the most amazing facet of the film. For a quick overview, the Mythic Structure is based on Joseph Campbell's "Hero of a thousand faces" and states, simply, that all coherent stories told follow the same basic structure, and if you would like to have a good refresher (and you should if you haven't seen this, where you been, under a rock?) go here http://www.mwp.com/pdf/WritersJourney.pdf Now here's At first light I assigned the father to be the hero as he was the main protagonist. But at the completion of the film you realize that he cannot be the hero as he ends tortured and punished. It is only then that you realize that he is the furthest thing from the hero, and is in fact, is the villain.
Allow me to explain.
The film is called Cache (hidden) and that is exactly what they are doing throughout the film. They show you his ordinary world, but as the film progresses you gain insight that the man you think you know is much different from what you are led to believe. So who is the hero then? Well, oddly enough it is the son of Majid the Arab. What? We see him twice in the movie, how can he be a hero if we cant follow his journey? Well we do follow his journey, rather, the effects of it.
So, lets take a closer look. I'll take it apart in the order that Campbell places it, even though (as Campbell suggests can be done) the order is rearranged. Since you cant have comments longer then 1000 words, you can check out the full review at www.proletariatfilm.com or below.