Fassbinder was certainly one of the most interesting modern directors in the second half of the twentieth century. He never seemed to worry about stepping outside the expected norms of script writing, staging and thematic presentation. Upon finishing a Fassbinder film, I find I'm often left wondering what it was all about, and what the director was essentially trying to get across to his audience.
This film is no exception to this. Based on a 1751 play by the Italian writer referenced in the film's title, it attempts to update the criticism of bourgeois society contained therein to a universal time-and-space reality, symbolized by the absolutely stark, colourless set, in which the actors are left with only the simplest wooden chairs on which to sit as a 'setting'.
What transpires in the dialogue - and more about that later - is a tale of gambling debts, infidelities, prostitution, blind avarice, jealousy, lust and class consciousness. Moral maxims are tested: bent out of shape and pulled this way and that, mostly in the name of settling one's debts, but also in the sense of personal hubris - more than once, the characters seem to simply enjoy sticking it to one another emotionally and, at times, even physically.
And their lines are spoken with almost uniform lack of expression. There is no emoting, no grandiose emphasis. The vocal track is thus as flat and colourless as the stage. The only variation is appears Fassbinder allowed his actors was one of volume: never even whispering, enunciation ranged from normal speech to yelling. These changes in volume levels occurred even with a veritable lack of emotional emphasis (which I too found hard to believe).
Moves towards some reconciliations between couples are made, but such seem to have been virtual afterthoughts: the real story here is one of moral laxity and venal depravity in the willingness of bourgeois society to give into its vices of gambling, avarice and lust.
The lasting effect is, as stated above, quite interesting but still more than a little confusing in this very attempt to engage the viewer in a unique way.
This film is no exception to this. Based on a 1751 play by the Italian writer referenced in the film's title, it attempts to update the criticism of bourgeois society contained therein to a universal time-and-space reality, symbolized by the absolutely stark, colourless set, in which the actors are left with only the simplest wooden chairs on which to sit as a 'setting'.
What transpires in the dialogue - and more about that later - is a tale of gambling debts, infidelities, prostitution, blind avarice, jealousy, lust and class consciousness. Moral maxims are tested: bent out of shape and pulled this way and that, mostly in the name of settling one's debts, but also in the sense of personal hubris - more than once, the characters seem to simply enjoy sticking it to one another emotionally and, at times, even physically.
And their lines are spoken with almost uniform lack of expression. There is no emoting, no grandiose emphasis. The vocal track is thus as flat and colourless as the stage. The only variation is appears Fassbinder allowed his actors was one of volume: never even whispering, enunciation ranged from normal speech to yelling. These changes in volume levels occurred even with a veritable lack of emotional emphasis (which I too found hard to believe).
Moves towards some reconciliations between couples are made, but such seem to have been virtual afterthoughts: the real story here is one of moral laxity and venal depravity in the willingness of bourgeois society to give into its vices of gambling, avarice and lust.
The lasting effect is, as stated above, quite interesting but still more than a little confusing in this very attempt to engage the viewer in a unique way.
